 |
| ||
|
||||||||
|
June 12, 2008 Losing the Information War with Amendment 56By Lance FairchokNow it's time for Democrats to change the subject, to distract the public, to pretend the dire predictions and the hysterics were about something else entirely, and hope the short memory of the electorate kills the issue by November. It's also time for a little vengeance on the Pentagon. The House passed Amendment 56 to the Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009 (384 to 23 in a voice vote), prohibiting the Department of Defense (DOD) from engaging in publicity or "propaganda" programs, banning funding for such programs and calling for an investigation by the Government Accounting Office (GAO) into the DOD Military Analyst Program. The justification is that Pentagon briefings on current operations presented to retired military pundits amounted to manipulating the media, and that it deceived the public with false information about the Iraq war.
The three sponsors of the Bill, Representatives Hodes, DeFazio and DeLauro, vote along party lines. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, they hold to their perspective that Iraq is a failure and the American people and the media have been deceived.
Webster defines propaganda as the "spreading of ideas or information to further or damage a cause," it is also "ideas or allegations spread for such purpose." The popular connotation of the word is false information, or information used to deceive or mislead. The left uses the word as a negative label for information that does not conform to their view, a tool to demean and discredit, regardless of truth. Their purpose is to dominate what the public sees with their messages and to eliminate contradictory information. In information warfare, this is called shaping the battle space. Throughout this war, the military has been inundated with negative press. Damaging leaks were rampant, coming from the Democrats in the Senate and the House, from the CIA and the State Department, even from inside the Pentagon. Every setback was exaggerated in an unrelenting information campaign to shape public perception. Disinformation from our enemies was accepted without critical analysis by much of the media. Papers worldwide splashed every unsubstantiated negative story they could find. Enemy agents posing as stringers were feeding false stories about American atrocities. Terror attacks were timed for the 24-hour news-cycle. The broadcast media's mantra for Iraq was "if it bleeds it leads" writ large. The enemy knew it, and used it. This relentless media assault frustrated and confounded the military, for whom the lessons of press malfeasance in Vietnam still rankle. How can you prosecute a war against a vicious enemy when your every action may be portrayed as criminal? How can you show success when failure is all Americans are allowed to see and hear? How do you get your message out when the press ignores or alters it? How can you tell the ground truth if no one is there to listen? The Pentagon had to respond; the onslaught of negative press was affecting the morale of troops performing brilliantly in a very hard fight, and undermining a war effort they were duty bound to prosecute. Rather than inserting "propaganda," the military attempted to get accurate information out, and the only way to do it was to ensure former military commentators had the very best, uncorrupted information possible. Military pundits already knew from the past that truth on the ground is seldom what's reported on the Six O'clock News. They understood the importance of that information getting through the media spin. On TV, a former officer speaks directly to the American people; the message gets through, unfiltered by the media template, from someone with experience. The "propaganda" these honorable men presented came from good faith assessments, and verified intelligence and data from the field. Rather than these veterans being conspiratorial liars, as the authors of Amendment 56 would have you believe, some of the most accurate information about Iraq came from them, which is exactly why their briefings anger the Democrats. There was no spin in General Petraeus' testimony on Capitol Hill. He was professional and honest about the dangers of the surge. He was also clear about the potential success. Congressional Democrats insulted this fine officer, allowed Code Pink lunatics to interrupt him, and pretended to wish him well. They then did everything they could to undermine him. The Democrats have used the men and women of our military as political props, easy targets for their anti-administration hysterics. The military does not have the luxury of turnstile political alliances and situational ethics. They are loyal, even when betrayed by Congress. The job we have given them is to win our wars, and then they are punished for doing so. A fact that you will not hear from the press is that military public affairs and media liaison offices stress a strict adherence to truth. Despite the myths we are fed from the left, the military understands that a lie will always come back to haunt you; while truth may be difficult at first, it is a far better and honorable course. The military still believes in honor. While individuals may break this code, they inevitably suffer for it. In each of the supposed "exposes" such as Abu Grab, Hadditha and Guantanamo Bay, the military had already conducted investigations and indicted those suspected of wrongdoing. They needed no prodding from the press. The New York Times in particular excels at "uncovering" stories that were not hidden, and spinning them into scandal after the fact. An April 20, 2008 article by David Barstow, Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon's Hidden Hand, fueled this controversy. In cherry picked quotes, Barstow spins a dark conspiracy from what would have been called effective press relations in previous years. The hand was not hidden, and in fact was quite open, as evidenced by the easy access Barstow apparently had to program specifics. All told, this military effort was only a moderate success when compared to the massive message machine the left has built to gain information dominance in the media, also often using taxpayer dollars. The information dominance they enjoy corrupts all the major networks and print media. No specifics on exactly what was misrepresented by military analysts about the Iraq war have been forthcoming from the Times. Despite the many stories about American misbehavior eventually proven false, there are few retractions. In its arrogance, the press evidently feels it owes the public no correction or apology. However, words and pictures are like bullets; you cannot take them back. Those words wasted American lives, encouraged and enabled our enemies, and caused untold suffering. Much of what the American people believe about Iraq derives form images, ideas and narratives produced by people who hope for our failure and would gladly abandon Iraq to ruin. The consequence of their advocacy, as ever, does not trouble them. Our failure in Iraq would aid them politically and that is all that matters to some. Amendment 56 is not about "propaganda." It is about controlling the information environment and hamstringing a source the Democrats cannot control. The difference between factual information and "propaganda" will be what Congressional Democrats determine it is, and ground truth, if told by the military, will require their certification. Amendment 56 is designed to strip one of the military's few defenses against political manipulation. That so many Republicans supported the amendment is more than discouraging. It shows how easily we are duped and how easily we can lose our freedoms to political sleight of hand. To those of us who remember the last six years' media coverage of the war, the accusations made by the authors of Amendment 56 are absurd. Their claim that military pundits somehow slanted media reporting with disinformation that encouraged support for the war is a cynical political tactic and a significant exaggeration. At best, they were able in a small way to even a very uneven playing field. In the battle for the hearts and minds of the American people, the Democrats work hard to silence information that undermines their agenda and they are winning. While the military fights for victory, Democrats plot their defeat, not on the battlefield, but in the minds of the very citizens they serve. In this, they diminish us as a nation and inch us ever closer to defeat. The political fight for America's access to the truth, whatever the source, is one battle the military cannot fight for us. They must remain apolitical. This is a fight, we the people, must win for them.
|
Recent Articles
Blog Posts
|
|
||
Comments
This is why we at our blog are calling for the investigation of seditious acts in accordance with The Smith Act of 1940.
http://www.anewtone.com/2008/06/they-live-amongst-us.html
Posted by: Snooper | June 12, 2008 02:06 AM
We won WWII on the back of propaganda.
What this insane policy would do is put into law the indignation of the left anytime the military attempts to save lives by providing information about American victories. Victories that would demoralize our (can I still say) enemies, the ones shooting at us.
It is part of the new leftist philosophy starting after WWII that said complete victory was wrong and all war, even wars to protect America can be rationalized as unnecessary and evil.
DKK
Posted by: LifeTrek | June 12, 2008 03:01 AM
'"The President and members of his Administration led the country to war on the basis of unproven assertions, later confirmed to be false, and have continued to misrepresent the truth on the ground.'
Re-stating old myths, are we, Mrs Pelosi? Just read Randall's Hoven 'the Barack Obama test' article on AT, or his 'Hey GOP: Cheer up, chin up!' article, also available on AT. And, Mrs Pelosi, please publicly admit that Bush overran Iraq while NOT allowing another terrorist attack in America itself. Since 9/11 no terrorist attacks have occurred in the US. Zero, aucun, null, nada. Even if a terrorist attack happens TOMORROW, the fact that 6 years and 9 months have passed without one is revealing.
America is the most secure country in the world.
Posted by: Zbigniew Mazurak | June 12, 2008 03:08 AM
Exactly, where are the First Amendment rights for which our military is fighting and dying ,and about which these elected officials swear to uphold in protecting and defending our Constitution?
Posted by: CS Goldstein | June 12, 2008 04:32 AM
I wrote a piece for Digital Journal and I asked why the Freedom of Speech for our Troops are being taken away.
Simply Amazing.
http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/256017
Posted by: Snooper | June 12, 2008 07:08 AM
Comrade Dean told the Democrat minions that it was necessary that Democrats get their "version of the truth" heard. What's wrong with silencing others, it's what real Marxists do -- Like Muslims, Marxists cannot exist in a world of free speech. You wait, they are going to teach that Limbaugh guy a thing or two about fairness. Fair is when the Democrat party apparatus controls all news, just like their role model the Soviet Union of old. Which BTW died of thousand paper cuts, deliver by fax machine.
Pe-lala-losi is just quoting her idle -- "He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past, controls the future." -- George Orwell
Posted by: bill-tb | June 12, 2008 07:10 AM
Ladies and gentlemen; I give you, The Fall of the Roman Empire. Pull up a chair, and observe, as our Roman Senate drive the greatest country EVER, in to the ground. My God, how did we get this far? History will record, the 1960's were the beginning of the end for the United States of America.
Posted by: Timothy L. Pennell | June 12, 2008 07:41 AM
Mr. Pages is a classic example of the left wing feeding into the Bush lied frenzy. I would bet my last dollar that he's never served in the military and has never read the United States Constitution. And what's with the comment about "another generation of African-American men being sacrificed as cannon fodder"? As I recall, their were plenty of European American and Asian American men that died in those wars too. Men, unlike Mr. Pages, who were willing to defend freedom.
Posted by: Ray DeRosa | June 12, 2008 07:45 AM
Mr. Pages, your a mouthpiece for the silly left. This is such typical mindless tripe it is hilarious. Millions of inner city kids could have been saved? Are you implying millions of inner city youths died? When did this happen? As the result of what? Lets try to address your muddled points. We have spent trillions on inner city youths and the results? Dependent welfare classes that have no incentive to move out into the economy as producers. Total family breakdown? You cannot show any positive benefit from the spending from the War on Poverty. How many black inner city youths have one parent? Further, which party and ideology runs most inner cities? In fact, are not the top 10 worst cities all run by liberal democrats? New Orleans was run by a liberal. WA DC is run by liberals and it is a dangerous cesspool of crime. Isn't it odd that everything liberals touch is a disaster? Do you never question outcome? Are good intentions merely all you require? Your post is not validated by any facts sir, it is mere spewing of emotional talking points. The rants of a DNC minion. Might I suggest a history book or actually researching some facts? There is not one shred of fact in your post. It is a childish rant to vent grievances against a imagined enemy. Were not the enemy, the left is. Why don't you stop looking to the government and look inward. Try reading some historical references to the real meaning of Freedom. Freedom does not come from Obama or WA DC. Freedom comes from the Constitution and us.
Finally blacks as cannon fodder? WW1 and WW2? Do you know anything at all about these wars? Even a nano-byte of history? Ever researched the causes of WW1? How many whites died? Did Muslims and the Ottoman Empire play a role? WW2? Are you referring to the blacks who served honorably in At Bastogne, at the Battle of the Bulge, half the artillery battalions surrounded by the Germans were black? Why do you denigrate their memory by making such claims? You reduce them from heroes to cannon fodder?
How about Iran that gave kids green keys to heaven and forced them to walk through mine fields? These are the innocents you are addressing?
Posted by: DaveT | June 12, 2008 08:13 AM
"We won WWII on the back of propaganda."
No way to prove this but I have always maintained that had we had the 24 hour liberal media outlets we have now, and the Democrat Party of today, I'm not so sure we could have won. Can you imagine them reporting the loss of more troops in 24 hours than in the entire Iraq war?
Posted by: Rich | June 12, 2008 09:10 AM
Jeffry Pages unwittingly reveals himself:
QUOTE: There is no intent by Democrats to muzzle free speech. Only to insure that responsible people and organizations are allowed the public airways.END QUOTE "Responsible people" of course means those that agree with him and the other Democrats. Stalin, Hitler, Mao, et al also insured that only "responsible people" had access to the public airways.
Posted by: Bob G | June 12, 2008 09:15 AM
How is the MSM's approach "not" propoganda? The MSM and the marxist/liberal/socialist congressmen are just hyper "pimps" for special interests and anti-American. Whe else would this Congress have the lowest rating in the history of this nation? They stopped representing the people and are filling their pockets with the people's and special interest money. All I heard growing up was that the 'children of the '60s' were going to 'change' things. They are now running the show and the only changes I have seen are rooted in socialism that is supposed to be for the good of all. The freemarket, liberties and freedom are what is best for all and they have spent their lives attempting to change the spirit and purpose for which this nation was founded. America is NOT an "experiment!" Until the congress gets their mind around that, the changes that are coming will only add to the divide and distruction of the greatest nation in the world. This censorship is another abridgement of the freedom of speech. Thanks for that confirmation Nancy! Speaker of the Twits
Posted by: Steve | June 12, 2008 09:21 AM
Does anyone think that Amendment 56 -- if it passes -- is enforceable?
Posted by: Ty Knoy | June 12, 2008 10:03 AM
The Truth about "information war" available for the American people here:
OSCs, Corporate Media and Google News: Murderers, murderers, murderers...
http://newsdeskhelsinkifinland.net/news/549/oscs_corporate_media_and_google_news_murderers_murderers_murderers___/
NDHF Net (Media Squad)
27th UN Jaeger Battalion
Finland - United Nations
http://newsdeskhelsinkifinland.net
Posted by: Newsdesk Helsinki Finland (NDHF) Net | June 12, 2008 10:25 AM
did Mr. Pages really just say Bill Clinton is the best president to date? I think I just threw up in my mouth.
Posted by: Speechless | June 12, 2008 10:29 AM
Perhaps Ammendment 56 might be slightly less transparent if Congress were to apply its anti-communications measures to all the domestic social agencies as well - the ones wich continually work with the Ad Council to fill the airwaves with nagging injunctions for various social platitudes, not to be prejudiced, to give volunteer time, to observe the Food Pyramid, save energy, to hug your kids, not stick beans up our noses, and so forth. If we could stifle our taxpayer-funded, civil nags is would be a great addition to civil peace.
Posted by: Rurik | June 12, 2008 10:30 AM
What has happened to my country?
People, think for yourselves.
Conservatives do it all the time. We bicker, we argue, we debate. We want the truth. We are not stupid and can filter out the truth from "propaganda." We read, we research, we don't accept all that is told to us.
We also respect our leaders, right or wrong. Some mistakes are made. Plenty of that to go around, but you learn from it, improve on it and go on.
With information only coming from one source (the MSM) it is impossible to know the truth, to descern the truth, to think, to be independent.
I have not served, much to my personal embarassment. I was at one time a part of the youth in '69 that thought it was cool to be against the "War." I was led around and "propagandadized" into a position, I later learned was based on false information from the MSM. I wish there had been another, independent source of information. I probably wouldn't have listened, but maybe, just maybe, it might have at least given me pause. I have met many who have served. It is my view that they would rather die than be dishonorable, no matter the cost. They are the best among us. I owe a debt to them I can never return, but they don't expect that, just our thanks. This is no way to thank them.
Information is power. Who ever controls information, controls the power. The more information you have, the less you can be controlled. Please give me more, not less information. Let me decide what is the truth.
Posted by: Tim S | June 12, 2008 10:38 AM
Mr. Pages is not a serious person and has nothing worthwhile to add to an intelligent discourse concerning this article on Amendment 56. He very much reminds me of my daughter when she was a child, crying for attention and desperatley seeking validation. Just ignore him and he will go away to find somebody else to bother.
"Never argue with an idiot; they just reduce you to their level and then beat you with experience."
Posted by: JayBee | June 12, 2008 10:52 AM
Mr Pages: I was going to reply to your LSD trip but to be truthful, YOU ARE NOT WORTH IT.
Willi
Posted by: Willi Schumacher | June 12, 2008 10:55 AM
This just another outrage perpetrated on the American public by the Democrats. And, it is shameful that Republicans went along with it-regardless of the effect it would have had on the passage of the larger funding bill.
The left is furious that despite all of their propaganda efforts, aided by reprehensible malcontents such as MoveOn, and code pink-(o), as well as their "fifth column"-the mainstream media, the majority of Americans can see the tide turning and would like us to leave Iraq AFTER we had achieved our objectives; they want our troops to come home as victors and liberators instead of surrendering "baby killers". And so, just as the "fairness doctrine" was fundamentally unfair, amendment 56-ostensibly to halt scurrilous FRIENDLY propaganda, will ensure that the only propaganda allowed will be that of the traitorous hill staff leakers and their treacherous cohorts; the agenda driven crew staffing the majority of the mainstream media.
I cannot stress enough that this requires swift action on all of our parts. We all need to write letters outlining our disgust to Reps Hodes, DeFazio and DeLauro; and send copies of the same on to Pelosi, Hoyer, and Boehner as well. Then, for good measure, send similar correspondences to your individual Senators, And to Reid as well. Although some would call this measure impotent, I contend that an avalanche of letters, decrying this act to the representatives, and cautioning the Senators to vote against any similar measure, would raise a few eyebrows and perhaps influence a few actions on Capitol Hill.
God Bless America
Semper Fidelis
Down with the neo-Marxists!
Do all you can to defeat comrade Obama in the fall!
Posted by: Bob Reed | June 12, 2008 11:05 AM
Mr. Pages,
Democrats have controlled the Congress for all but about 10 years of the past 70! The idea that they "best represent the needs and desires of the people" must mean the people attached to the federal government for their daily 'wants.' Has the welfare roles been reduced? Has the number of inner city teenage parents seen a decline? Has housing for the poor improved? How are our education test scores stacking up against other industrial nations?
For heaven's sake, the free markets, the liberties and the freedoms that our nation provides its citizens has been the few sustaining societal components that have made this country the greatest in history. Our freedom to pursue our own desires, in a safe environment, are guaranteed by our founding documents and the spirit in which this nation was established.
The federal government was designed with "limited and enumerated powers." It was not designed to provide you with income, health care, housing, education, retirement or jobs. It was designed to provide lands, judiciary and military to protect you while you GET ALL THAT STUFF ON YOU OWN! Until you get your mind around that, you may want to go to live in a land where the fed gives everyone everything and see how much you like; restrictions, regulations, no incentives for personal growth and economic stagnation. Socialism, Marxism, communism and dictatorships all fail. None have ever succeeded because the yearning to be free and decide for our selves how to live our lives doesn't come from government. America isn't an experiment waiting around for something better to come along. Should you decide to give Cuba or France a try, I'm sure your nearest conservative would be happy to buy the ticket.
God bless.
Posted by: Steve | June 12, 2008 11:12 AM
Jeffry Pages wrote: "Democrats control the congress today, and will OWN the White House after November."
Well as Dave T alluded to, that's great to know. I'm looking forward to the 10 worst cities expanding from coast to coast. Watch the skies as well. You'll certainly see another jetliner plowing into a highrise after November.
Posted by: D-Rider | June 12, 2008 11:15 AM
If amendment 56 passes, I suppose that - in all fairness - it will have to apply to ALL media reps, won't it? Then I guess that we can just shut down the pentegon press room, since the military will be prohibited from engaging in "propoganda". And then, all the "reporters" who lurk around the pentagon will have to go elsewhere to ply their "trade". There just won't be any briefings at all for anybody - left or right. Sounds fair to me. (I wonder if the politicians thought of that? Or that the military won't be able to give any politicians - Republican or democRAT - any more private briefings?)
And Jeffry Page _ your understanding of history is nonexistant. You are obviously a product of the modern experiment in education/indoctrination; and simply spout what you have been fed by your masters. Try studying history; and developing an independent mind. Just try an independent thought.
Posted by: Mamba1-0 | June 12, 2008 11:19 AM
Propaganda is just a fancy word for lying, and I only see lies from Leftist Democrats like Nancy Pelosi and the like.
"The President and members of his Administration led the country to war on the basis of unproven assertions, later confirmed to be false, and have continued to misrepresent the truth on the ground."
Quote me the supposed lie from President Bush that Nancy Pelose refers to.
I fear for the future of my children and my country when half the country can't figure out that we are engaged in a just war against an evil totalitarian idiology.
Posted by: Johnny Appleseed | June 12, 2008 11:44 AM
If this Ammendment saves at least one more life, then it would be worth it. Ed, I enjoy reading your atricles, because it makes me realize how much out of touch you and your follow conservatives are with the common man that bleeds on the batte field. I am an active member of the Armed Forces. I enlisted right out of high school, and just like everyone else that enlisted, I was full of pride and honor. I was also young and misguided. Let me tell you the reality of this war.
1. The media only gets to see what the military public affairs allows them to see. This must be approved by a high ranking officer, which is close to retirment and won't compromise his pension. This means he does not care about making sure the truth gets out, or how many more service memebers die, he or she is looking out for their future.
2. The military public affairs does not allow anyone in the armed service to speak to the media without their permission, and when a service member does have an interview with the media, there is a public affairs officer present to moniter and make sure nothing is said that is negative. We are briefed on what to say... and the brief is always ends with these words, "remember that you are subject to punishment under the UCMJ for anything negative against the command or the president." Is this the truth you talk about in your aritcle?
The military is a government within a government. I can tell that you (ED) have never served a day in the military or you would know this. Just like any government it needs citizens to do its dirty job. When I was a recruiter, we were told to never go to the high schools were the kids had well off parents. We were told to go to the inner city schools, to talk to the kids that had no future and pump them with honor and pride and somehow make them enlist. We lied to them. Just like this administration has lied to us..... "the surge is working" what surge? you mean escalation! the surge working is the biggest lie so far. I challenge anyone in your audience to prove me wrong. I also challenge all your well to do conservatives..... if you believe so much in this war? when I can help your child enlist in the Armed Forces of America? I am a qualified recruiter, and we are short of people right now..... who is first?
Posted by: Tony Mendez | June 12, 2008 11:45 AM
What do you expect? We can't have good news coming out of Iraq. It just doesn't fit their agenda.
I've been to Iraq and we did a ton of good. In fact I went out of my way to make a difference. We all did and still do.
When I tell people what we did there and how we were treated by the locals I more often then not get this dumbfounded look that says it all.
Pelosi and her crowd will not rest until we are spit on in airports and portrayed as thugs and baby killers.
Make a special trip to Syria to meet with state sponsors of terror....Nice. Then gag our military leadership.
Whats next Jane Fonda as Obama's secretary of state?
Posted by: Jeffrey Gates | June 12, 2008 11:47 AM
I guess there are good people and bad people in every field... including the military. Take for instance, Jeffrey Gates....good. And Tony Mendez....bad.
Posted by: D-Rider | June 12, 2008 01:01 PM
Mr. Page
During the Battle of the Bulge, There were over 400,000 casualties in the months of December and January of 45. The was enough "sacrifice" to go around for everybody.
Posted by: Thomas W Coughlan | June 12, 2008 01:13 PM
Mr. Pages??.....Holy Cow!!! You can't be serious? What universe are you living in? It is unfortunate that people like Mr. Pages are allowed to vote and reproduce. Scarrrry!!!
Finally, try as they might the dems will never be able to control the flow of truthful information. They may silence Limbaugh or Hannity or the others...but the internet is hear to stay and People like the ones here at AT...contributors and bloggers and writers will alway be able to get their message out. Mr. Pages...you and your ilk will never control the truth...because we are the truth. You just can't stand it.
Posted by: Jerry | June 12, 2008 01:34 PM
"We don't need to have another generation of African-American men sacrificed as cannon fodder, as was done in WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam and now Bush's War. "
Funny, over 75% of front line casualties are white from Korea onwards. WWIIand WWI would push it even farther. White people do the brunt of the dying for our volunteer military. Go look up the military data, it is available, here is one source.
http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/RACE-OMB-WC.pdf
"If this Ammendment saves at least one more life, then it would be worth it. "
Hogwash, every life has a price. The military knows exactly what yours is worth down to the finger. You volunteered and nobody forced you to.If you don't like the military then leave. There are plenty of poor youth whose lives were bettered by their voluntary service in our military. Both my parents went to school thanks to the Navy.
"I challenge anyone in your audience to prove me wrong."
Prove you wrong? You already admitted you were a liar in your own posting and everyone can tell you have bothing but biterness driving your words. Why waste time proving the obvious?
Posted by: Anonymous | June 12, 2008 02:11 PM
I see my lackie troll, the coward that IT is, is up to ITS pathetic tricks. What a loser.
"Jeffrey" is an idiot and follows me around and tries to pass ITSELF off as me.
Poor thing.
Posted by: Snooper | June 12, 2008 02:20 PM
Tony M., according to your mentality, saving just one life, warrants passing more stupid liberal laws. If so, I'm sure you'd like to see a law passed requiring all former military people to wear straight jackets so the few that want to commit suicide, dont. If it just saves one life.... It might also keep stupid posts off the web.
Posted by: Rob Zerona | June 12, 2008 02:25 PM
What needs to happen to press sedition charges on the likes of Pelosi, Fienstien, Boxer, Reid, Kerry, Clinton et al, particularly if they are up for re-election?
Posted by: Ron Newsom | June 12, 2008 02:32 PM
It would be interesting to compare the number of African Americans dying each day in the Middle East with the number dying due to shootings in the inner cities of America.
Posted by: RickG | June 12, 2008 02:53 PM
I'm sure everyone has thier own criteria for what makes a great president, but I'm also sure that the greatest presidents of the 20th century are FDR and Reagan, respectively. One who pulled the country out of depression and then won a world war, and was elected to 4 terms, and one who righted the U.S. economic ship, defeated communism and won a cold war. Two very different men from both ends of the political spectrum who served their country brilliantly.
Posted by: Jeremy Shaver | June 12, 2008 03:05 PM
Tony Mendez, You sound like it's been a long time since you wore the uniform. Things have changed. Service demographics do not match your tired leftist boilerplate. How long has it been 15, 20, 25 years? Our military have higher educations than the average populace. In fact they are motivated, upwardly mobile, and dedicated to what they do. The surge has been an enormous success. It's a middle class war, with average kids, minorities or "disadvantaged" are not serving in disproportionate numbers. Those days are gone, though you appear to have stayed mired in the past. We are well served by the military. Unfortunatly that cannot be said for our legislators, particuarlly the disloyal Democrat opposition, whom the author rightly takes to task!
Posted by: Autodidact | June 12, 2008 03:15 PM
The constant, brazen promotion of totalitarianism and the equally brazen moves to mainstream leftist radicalism are frightening beyond belief. These tactics are particularly horrifying because, while they've been tried before, they just might work, this go 'round.
Posted by: Beth | June 12, 2008 03:30 PM
Re: Mr. Pages above. Of course, only responsible people deserve the right to free speech.
So where shall we start? I mean, of course, with the immediate revocation of the First Amendment Rights of all but the most responsible people. We could start with anybody who has every disagreed with you, and finish with those who ever might.
Truly, a communications stratgey Stalin himself would be proud of.
It seems as though enough people have already shot back over your unfortunate misunderstanding of casualty numbers along racial lines (as if it matters), so I'll leave that alone.
Posted by: Tony | June 12, 2008 03:32 PM
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,...
NO LAW, none nada zippo nothing that abridges the freedom of speech not even the speech of the military not even if das haus ubersprechenfuerher pelosi commands it.
Posted by: zaflart | June 12, 2008 03:44 PM
For Tony Mendez:
You obviously aren't referring to being an active member of the United States Armed Forces. Your lack of identification leads me to believe you haven't been proud and honorable for some time.
I am on Active Duty in the United States Army, and have been for 23 years. My direct experience with our Soldiers being able to speak their mind is that it has never been more free than it is today. Soldiers are free to express their points of view as long as it doesn't compromise secruity considerations... And as far as UCMJ - last time I checked, you could be punished under UCMJ for saying that stuff without being in front of a microphone... That's all part of good order and discipline (do you correct or admonish your children if they speak against you as a parent???)
You can cherry pick how you represent the facts, but own up to the manipulation that you accuse others of us who serve honorably of doing.
Posted by: Scott C | June 12, 2008 04:23 PM
American Thinker you must be doing something right as you now have a Jihad website monitoring the articles and posts. The post "truth about the information war" posted by NDHF at http://newsdeskhelsinkfinlandnet. is in reality a Jihad site. Maybe we can direct Jeffery there as he would fit right in. Michele Mitchell
Posted by: Michele MitchelljOHN | June 12, 2008 04:27 PM
"If you take a starving dog and make him prosper he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and congress."
-with apologies to Mark Twain
Posted by: Jeffrey Gates | June 12, 2008 04:44 PM
The political fight for America's access to the truth, whatever the source, is one battle the military cannot fight for us. They must remain apolitical. This is a fight, we the people, must win for them.
The Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group has been saying that for years.
Posted by: Cannoneer No. 4 | June 12, 2008 05:10 PM
Propaganda: Can a
Word Decide a War?
Posted by: Cannoneer No. 4 | June 12, 2008 05:23 PM
Has anyone ever wondered why the troops often have a different story from what the media reports? You know, my unit had an open invitation to any reporter to ride out with us anytime. While we did get some, many more declined. They prefered to stay in the safety and comfort in the green zone. Rather, they would pay some unknown local to go out and get the story for them. Often, these "locals" turned out to be on the pay rolls of people like Muqtada Al Sadr and others with interests against the US. The few that did ride with us were often impressed with what was going on in our sector.
One particular journalist who wrote stories for the Christian Science Monitor, was particularly impressed with our interaction and progress with the local populace. This journalist was a true journalism veteran of this area. He had traveled all over Iraq, spoke the language fluently and had many friends and contacts throughout the country. And this guy was giving us great reviews in person. However, the story he wrote on us was greatly watered down. So either, he was lying to our face, which I don't really believe, or someone higher than him couldn't allow a positive story get out of Iraq.
So often, true observations, good and bad, usually must come from the vets themselves. This is what the dems aim to silence. Because, more often than not, the troops, have good news. The Dems cannot win in the true arena of ideas in any situation, so they seek to silence there opponents.
This is another example of this. It is truly insidious as they are now targeting the very people who guarantee their safety. What's even more insidious is that this counter-insurgency is largely fought on the information battlefield.
Many reasonable people realize this, which makes me wonder if the people who passed this are really that stupid, or have another purpose in mind. I'll call it for what I see it, "Whose side are these people on?" As an Iraq war veteran, I take this as a personal slap in the face. So, I am going to help bypass this seditious legislation and tell everyone what I saw in Iraq. Ready for some "propaganda" Mr Pages?
Kool aid drinkers like Pages have no idea what they speak of. I see you have made many entries on this site speaking your mind Mr Pages, as a veteran, I would like to say, "You're welcome." I have been to scenes were families had there loved ones pulled out of their house and shot in the head in front of their wives and children for speaking up. I have looked upon the headless bodies of those who were pulled out of their house in the middle of the night in front of their terrified families, never to be heard from again.
You see, in many of the countries I have been in, I could legally hunt you down and beat you mercilessly for the things you've said. I could throw you in jail and you'd never see the light of day again. In fact, I have helped hunt down the very people who seek to do that and far worse to you and every other person in this country Mr Pages. You're Welcome.
Despite what you think, I have, in the course of my duties, met many interesting people who would love to turn people like you into little meat-puppets before sawing your head off for fun. I have personally witnessed their handy work. And you, Mr Pages, would be such a prize for them. Oh, they'd save you for last! The rest of us will be long gone by then. But, make no mistake, you are the same infidel as we, a "pig-dog" just the same. But your supposedly "superior" intellect of "peace" and "understanding" will serve them well as you convince other useful idiots from resisting them until it is too late, just like you're doing now. They would love to see the terror in your eyes as they sharpened their knives. They would dance with glee at your sudden sense of betrayal.
However, despite the things you have said, you will remain free and rightly so, because, despite what you and the looney left believe about Gitmo and such, you'll never even be looked at by anyone in Gov't. I know you'd like to think so, but you're not that important. And, the troops of this country will "stand ready to commit extreme violence on your behalf" so you can "sleep peaceably in your bed at night." (ref. R. Hienlien).
You see Mr Pages, despite your suburban rosy view of the world, "It takes force to secure a nation." I know that's tough for you to believe, but its true. When you get out and meet real people who truly hate Americans no matter what you say or do, you'll realize this.
When you can quit parroting extreme left talking points and form a coherent thought of your own, you might begin to see the light of day.
It's not that hard Mr Pages, all you have to do is begin observing what is actually happening around you. Although, living in America, that may be hard to do.
It is tough to see reality when you live in such a sheltered country. You're Welcome, Mr Pages. You may have to actually, get this, travel outside the country. And not to Tiajuana or Cabo San Lucas. I would recommend somewhere in the middle east.
Walk up to someone there and stun them with your dizzying intellect and see what kind of reaction you get. If you're still alive, come tell me about it. See what a "wonderful", "peaceful" world it is out there. Tell them you're an American who is there to apoligize for the "Evil" Bush administration and see what kind of reaction that gets you. As I said, I'd like to hear of your experience, if you're still around.
It sounds like you are the product of the American public education system, so I tried not to be too hard on you or use big words. I would also recommend getting a classical education covering the subject of critical thinking.
As far as your posting insulting honorable veterans who have tried to pass on their observations on what they see, I would like to say, once again, "Your welcome Mr Pages."
May you have a wonderful, fullfilling life of posting your heart out. Just remember one thing, Teddy Roosevelt once said, "It is better to remain silent and appear ignorant, than open your mouth and remove all doubt."
Posted by: Chris Carpenter | June 12, 2008 05:45 PM
Chris,
Thank you for your service and your comments. The young soldiers I meet always put things in a crystal clear light and you have done so magnificently. Most Americans are proud of you and your comrades, never forget that, regardless of the left, you truly represent the spirit of this great land. Strength, honor, and compassion define us, and so our enemies rightly fear us.
Respectfully,
Lance Fairchok
Posted by: Lance Fairchok | June 12, 2008 06:58 PM
Nothing has become more important to the collectivist anti-Americans on the left than silencing the ability of those that do not agree with them down. They are angry that a concerted and well orchestrated campaign of massive and shameless lies was not able to again convince the American public to hand the country a defeat, and they are finally mobilizing for war. Of course the only wars these idiots like are the ones that hurt America and its interests. Nobody produces more propaganda than the left. That so many people have bought into their ridiculous and stupid collectivist lies is proof of that. They have just become desperate to prevent America from succeeding in Iraq because then history will record their shameful actions during that time. And of course Bush then looks good, and to this crowd that is worse than nuclear fire wiping this country off the planet. These people are vile and evil, and this attempt to deny the military the ability to point out that they are liars proves it in spades.
Posted by: AlexinCT | June 12, 2008 08:23 PM
Dear Lance,
It is the people such as yourself and the other authors of this website who make it all worthwhile. God bless the intellectual free thinkers!!! Thank you for bringing this issue to light. The rights we have in this country are what make it worth while. The Iraqi people are not slow to catch on to this. During my time in Iraq, I witnessed them taking enthusiatically to free market enterprise and human rights. They can and will succeed. This has been a long hard road, no doubt, with some mistakes made. But, if we continue this, I believe it will be worth it. Thank you for the support you and your colleagues have given to the troops.
Posted by: Chris Carpenter | June 12, 2008 08:28 PM
Dear Chris,
Thanks for that post. I hope you don't mind, but I pasted and copied your whole post to a folder reserved for my son. He just left for Army basic, infantry. My white son. It's something I will have him read when he briefly comes home in a few months before going over to meat puppet land. Thank you for all you have done, and are doing now.
And yes, Mr Page, he's white, HS grad, smart. He signed up last year, with alot of classmates who get it. They shipped out 90 from this little podunk day before yesterday, and he went today with about the same. All white.Thanks so much for demeaning my son, I'd really like to meet you in person.
Posted by: Phil Roy | June 12, 2008 08:58 PM
Regarding Mr. Jeffrey Pages, his posts are so over the top absurd, that I strongly doubt their sincerity. Consider the possibility that he may be posting them to deflect the follow-up discussions from the information in the main article to refutations of the nonsense he posts. The sincerity of anyone calling Bill Clinton the greatest president of the 20th century has to be suspect. In this way he can make a serious negative impact in the quality of follow-up discussion on this site. I'd suggest ignoring him or perhaps even deleting his posts.
Posted by: Charley S. | June 12, 2008 09:26 PM
Mr. Carpenter
Thank you for your excellent rebuttal of the lunatic rants of Mr. Page. I truly wonder what color the sky is on his world. As Mr. Fairchok so eloquently put it, most Americans (and many Canadians such as I) are proud of the work of military men and women such as yourself, not only from the U.S., but from all freedom-loving nations.
Posted by: SteveInPA | June 12, 2008 09:37 PM
Jeffery Pages...........Wow! Your unadulterated loathing and hatred just ooze from the screen. I can just imagine you tapping out your replies in apoplectic rage. You are obviously incensed that the rest of us "unenlightened neanderthals " (obviously, my conjecture) just don't "get it". Of course, I'm sure that the adjectives you privately use to describe some of us are probably unprintable in this forum. Speaking as someone who is un-offendable (due to the fact that feelings of offense come from ones own sense of self-importance.) your posts are quite amusing.
Assuming you do feel that you are superior to the rest of us. I may be incorrect, but judging by the tone of your posts I feel it is a safe assumption.
I suggest you do some research on a Mr. George Soros. If you make an honest effort I think you'll discover who you are really pimping for. The Democratic party has been bought by Mr. Soros and is using it to his own ends. Don't take my word for it, I encourage you to do your own research for once. I was quite shocked to find out about how much this individual actively hates this country. Oddly enough, he does have a love of our money. Best of luck to you.
To Tony, if you were in the service, Thank you for your service. I could not disaree with you more on most everything. However, if you would like an unvarnished view of how things are going in Iraq, I suggest you check out michaelyononline.com.
Best Regards to all,
RCJ
Posted by: R.C.Johnson | June 12, 2008 09:48 PM
To Snooper:
I would like to comment on your comment: The United States did not win the WWII on its own. Russians took most of it and their input in winning WWII, in my opinion, is much greater than the US's. I understand, that this is not what you learn at school in the history class, but consider just the fact that 20,000,000 soviet people gave their lives for that victory in WWII.
Posted by: Gregory | June 16, 2008 09:03 AM
To Gregory, who said: "Russians took most of it and their input in winning WWII, in my opinion, is much greater than the US's. I understand, that this is not what you learn at school in the history class, but consider just the fact that 20,000,000 soviet people gave their lives for that victory in WWII."
Let's not forget that the socialists and the national socialists started the European theater of WWII as allies, and enabled each other. Without diminishing the contribution of the Red Army to the defeat of National Socialist Germany, the number of deaths is not the indicator of the Russian contribution. The idea is to kill the enemy. Russia held the line eventually and deserve admiration and credit. But they contributed almost nothing to the war against the collectivist racist and imperialist regime in Japan. And the reason they lost 27 million people was because Stalin had purged the ranks of the military and left it fundamentally unprepared to fight. Russians have been our worthiest allies and adversaries. But to suggest they won WWII is absurd. They played a vital role in one theater. But that's not the point. The point is that the collectivists in our Democrat party are undermining our defense by taking one more tool out of the Pentagon's arsenal. The victors of WWII never would have accepted that. How would the USSR have prevailed on the Eastern Front in Leningrad and Stalingrad without propaganda?
Posted by: sullinsea | June 21, 2008 01:41 PM