Mon Nov 12, 2012, 10:37 AM
bigtree (58,028 posts)
If we watch closely we'll see the exposing (and hopefully, unraveling) of the Pentagon propagandists
from Michael Hastings at Buzzfeed: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/the-sins-of-general-david-petraeus
The Sins Of General David Petraeus
Petraeus seduced America. We should never have trusted him.
_____ Petraeus’ first biographer, former U.S. News and World Report reporter Linda Robinson, wrote a book about him, then went to CENTCOM to work for him. Yes — a so-called journalist published a book about him, then started getting a paycheck from him soon after. This went largely unremarked upon.
Another huge supporter was Tom Ricks, a former Washington Post journalist who found a second career as unofficial press agent for the general and his friends. Ricks is the ringleader of what I like to call “the media-military industrial complex,” setting the standard for its incestuous everyday corruption. He not only built Dave up, he facilitated the disastrous liaison between Broadwell and Petraeus. Ricks helped get Broadwell a literary agent, a six-figure book deal, and a publisher.
Ricks blurbed her in All In, and earlier had promoted her content on his blog — the oddly titled Travels With Paula, a headline he slapped to a story about the U.S. military’s total destruction of a small village in southern Afghanistan. Broadwell described the ultra-violent wipeout in favorable terms — and when she was confronted with an angry villager whose house had been destroyed, she wrote that the Afghan’s tears and anger were a “a fit of theatrics.”
This was the kind of bullshit Ricks and Broadwell had been pushing — and it not only wasn’t called bullshit, it was embraced as serious work. Ricks wasn’t the only offender, of course — Petraeus more or less had journalists from many major media outlets slurping from the Pentagon’s gravy train. The typical route was to have all the cash and favors funneled through a third party like the Center for a New American Security.
CNAS was a Petraeus-inspired operation from its inception in 2007, and it made its reputation promoting Petraeus’ counterinsurgency plans. No problem, right? Except that it put the journalists who were covering those same plans and policies on its payroll. For instance, New York Times Pentagon correspondent Thom Shanker took money and a position from CNAS and still covered the Pentagon; Robert Kaplan, David Cloud from the Los Angeles Times, and others produced a small library’s worth of hagiographies while sharing office space at CNAS with retired generals whom they’d regularly quote in their stories.
read more: http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/the-sins-of-general-david-petraeus
article forwarded by a tweet from, Joel Whitney @joel_whitney
Here's Michael Hastings on how Broadwell was part of the military's ongoing payola for journalists. http://www.buzzfeed.com/mhastings/the-sins-of-general-david-petraeus?s=mobile …
Petraeus and Pentagon Propaganda
Pentagon weighing news and spin - The top general in Iraq seeks to pierce the wall between public affairs and efforts that attempt to sway foreign populations.
April 18, 2007|Julian E. Barnes | Times Staff Writer
A 2004 memo by Gen. Richard B. Myers, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, codified the separation between public affairs, which communicates with the press and public, and "information operations," which attempts to sway people in other countries.
But Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, has asked for changes that would allow the two branches to work more closely. His request has unleashed a debate inside the Pentagon between those who say the separation has made the Defense Department less agile and those who believe that restructuring the relationship would threaten to turn military spokesmen into propaganda tools.
Lincoln Group Propagandists Paid to Tell Afghans Their Bombs are Worse than Ours
Iraq Propaganda Program . . .
Inspector General Reports Pentagon Merged Their Propaganda With PR
8 replies, 1570 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
If we watch closely we'll see the exposing (and hopefully, unraveling) of the Pentagon propagandists (Original post)
|The Magistrate||Nov 2012||#2|
Response to The Magistrate (Reply #2)
Mon Nov 12, 2012, 11:32 AM
bigtree (58,028 posts)
4. few Generals I can say I liked
Wesley Clark seems like a good guy.
I liked Ike, but I was a child.
There's a nest of these fellows, though, who are like a cabal. They are openly dismissive of the primacy of civilian control of the military, and are wedded to the notion that the survival of these defense industries with their multi-billion dollar backlogs of approved projects is the same as defending our national security. The only thing perpetuating these operators and actors is their ability to churn out these official looking position papers and presentations behind their spit and polish to their congressional benefactors who accept them, often unquestioned, like moms pinning a toddler's drawing to the fridge.
Response to bigtree (Original post)
Mon Nov 12, 2012, 02:18 PM
RobertEarl (10,030 posts)
8. That stinks
Obama's people smelled it and when it finally got to his desk he chessed it out and laid it all on the repubs and the pentagon.
Had to wait til after the election so it was no issue for him. Indeed he even told Betrayus to not resign. Damn, Obama and his people are good. Took down a general without a shot being fired. A crooked stinking general.