Interesting article about how we shouldnt believe everything we read in the news

[Jaime_s]

Propaganda...

Interesting article I found in the Chicago Tribune. Kind of shows us how the US can manipulate things to make themselves look/seem better.

Here's the link:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-lynch,1,2805576.story?coll=chi%2Dhomepagenews2%2Du tl

[jku]

Great syndicated editorial to tell everyone about - it ran in the LA TIMES today as well. For those of you who haven't read it, go to robertscheer.com. It's the REAL story behind PRIVATE LYNCH.

Now in defense of the Media, the information supplied came from the PENTAGON and a woman named VICTORIA CLARKE. The fact that the story was found to be made up was because of an investigation by the BBC (ABC ran the story a few weeks ago).

I work in NEWS, and recall that the time the LYNCH story came out - we were having a series of funerals of AMERICAN SOLDIERS dominating the coverage. It seems clear Bush's Administration and the Pentagon didn't want to leave a BAD TASTE in the mouths of Americans after this war, like the bad taste left after Vietnam and Gulf War 1.

Americans need to love war because that provides billion dollar defense contracts to major military industrial corporations that ONLY make their money on war.

I'll tell you something (I'm anonymous and can speak my mind here, thank God). My Dad, uncle, and brother all work in military industrial companies that directly receive their money from government contracts - they are well aware that any Republican Administration in office is benevolent to these companies, and find voting for Bush and the continuation of War directly related to their job security. They don't like it, but they need to eat too.

Look where the contracts are going after the war! Halliburton, Chevron, etc. These companies will make billions on the blood of Americans and Iraqis. The Propaganda machine needs to be fed to allow this system to continue! BTW, there is about a TRILLION dollars missing from the PENTAGON (that's 1000 BILLION dollars!). Who pays for that in the end? You and me! When anyone tells you immigrants and poor single mothers are sucking up your tax money, laugh - because that is hate speak and it's a lie. The military takes up WAY MORE money than it needs - $400 BILLION this year alone. That's more than the next FIFTEEN countries PUT TOGETHER!!!

Poor Private Lynch conveniently has amnesia, and the Iraqi lawyer who saved her won't talk to the media...

oh wait, Clay is singing now... :(

[dakotagopher]

I think this is mostly speculation, no? I find it hard to believe the gov't could stage something so big. Somebody would talk. Weren't there a couple hundred logistical people involved in the rescue (assuming, of course, it did happen as pentagon described it)?

Pretty tough to keep the lid on something that big........

Anything is possible, of course, but I tend to give the pentagon the benefit of the doubt over the BBC.

[Jaime_s]

I truely believe that our gov't could stage something so big. There are probably so many things that have happened that we will probably never find out about.

Jaime

[jku]

Have you guys ever heard the phrase: "he who smelt it, dealt it"
or maybe "thou protest too much"?

Right when this editorial hit, the O'reilly/Hannity/Limbaugh propaganda machine went into full effect. Their basic assertion is that we can't believe the BBC or the doctors they interviewed. The doctors have agendas and could have been lying to the BBC.
Generals came out commenting that "the special forces are highly trained and were under tremendous danger." But don't the spin-masters (Victoria Clarke comes from a Madison Avenue background, never worked a day in the military until she joined the Pentagon Ministry of Propaganda - that's a FACT) have something MUCH MORE to gain?

First, you can tell it hit a nerve. They not only attacked the BBC, but also the writer - Professor Robert Scheer - calling him ANTI-AMERICAN (BTW, we're a nation founded on rebels and iconoclasts lest anyone forget). The LYNCH story is so important to the myth of this war, as it was the only truly pure moment that Americans as a whole recall even a month later. There is a movie coming out on the incident, and some kind of book I believe. The American public needs to love this war for Bush to get re-elected. Forget the 99 ways they screwed up post-war Iraq and focus on the one moment we could all agree was "good." They give the doctor who "saved" her a green card and a job that pays $500,000, she has "amnesia," and our military industrial complex with all their cool $400 Billion gadgets look dashing - taxpayer support for bigger military budgets continue. Then special interests are taken care of once Bush gets into office. Rupert Murdoch and Clear Channel can get their new media ownership rules passed by the FCC - all the rich guys are really happy.
We, the hard working middle class salt-of-the Earth, continue to get screwed.

The BBC is paid for by public funds. They don't need advertising. They have no agenda outside of objective journalistic integrity. It just looks bad for people who are trying to sell lies and get caught - so the easy answer is "liberal bias." I used to believe the "liberal bias" myth until I started working in a newsroom. Truth and objectivity are placed at the very top. Lawyers comb through everything. Research is thorough. Come in a conservative, see what Bush and his thugs are trying to do this country from a front row seat. I bet you'll change your mind.

Yes, the Jayson Blair situation is unsettling - and the NY TIMES is working hard to clean up the mess; because they believe what they do is important and must be trusted. Wouldn't it be great if all the LIARS and THIEVES on Wall Street took the lesson of the NY TIMES and got rid of their scumbags too?

Until the BBC retracts their story - they are telling the truth. Believe it.
Any speculation on their sources from right wing idealouges with clear financial agendas is bullshit - plain and simple.

[dakotagopher]

Quote
=============================================
Until the BBC retracts their story - they are telling the truth. Believe it.
Any speculation on their sources from right wing idealouges with clear financial agendas is bullshit - plain and simple.
=============================================

JKU - I don't think you can say this with certainty. Your judgement appears to be swayed a bit by political viewpoint, no offense.

Again, anything is possible, and the Lynch rescue may have been staged, but at this point I haven't seen any clear proof. This appears for the most part to be speculation combined with a couple of secondhand accounts of what may have "really" happened. Very interesting, regardless.

If this was staged, I believe it's too big to stay under wraps for long. But to demand that we "believe it" without firm proof, seemingly unwilling to even consider the possibility that the speculation being offered by "right wing idealouges" is accurate - you seem to have the blinders on! Open your mind, look at this from all angles. My opiniion.

[jku]

I think you're right DGopher - we should consider all angles. Maybe my youthful vitriol got the best of me. :redface:
I'd also like to thank you for participating in this debate and keeping it civil. In the end we may both disagree, but you have to admit it keeps us both sharp.

Caveat: Please understand I'm subjected to the awful way Bush is running this country on a daily basis; forced to hear his lies to young idealistic soldiers head-on. Everything from the latest to War in Iraq to the inept missle defense shield being built by October 2004 that will be EXEMPT from testing.

I hate to be as bad as the Anti-Clinton types a few years ago, but is there anything positive he has done for this country that isn't shrouded in some sort of deception or political gain? I'm curious as to how you see him, because its clear I have my issues. And again, I have nothing personal against the man - he seems affable and charming. But after reading two biographies about him, and then closely watching his policies these past 2.5 years, its been staggering to me how manipulative it all is. I just don't understand how people can't see past the lies?

Anyways, here's some articles as reference:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2808613

But let's not forget the other instances in a time of war that we have been lied to. The following are examples of one used to rally people around a war, similar to the current Jessica Lynch debate we are having. Soldiers are GOOD as long as they don't talk, and soldiers are usually the LAST to know how they are being manipulated - i.e. Agent Orange, Gulf War Syndrome/Depleted Uranium.

The ones that stand out include the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, in which our government claimed the North Vietnamese fired on a ship - that led to an escalation in which more troops and equipment were sent over, and sent the body count skyrocketing. The whole situation was later found to be false after it was too late. Patriotic Americans who wanted to trust their government were lied to, and in turn sent their children to die.

One that is somewhat clear in my mind occured during the last Persian Gulf War. Basically the Kuwaitis needed a way to get American interested in fighting a war in their country against Iraqis. They hired a PR company named Hill & Knowlton to come up with a PR campaign. Abortion was huge issue in 1990, more so than now, so the "IRAQIS THROW BABIES FROM INCUBATORS" campaign was (no pun intended) born. George H.W. Bush repeated that incident as justification for going to war. The daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador later told that false story to congress, which led to more support for the War.
It was all a lie.
Americans soldiers died in that war as well - just to save an oil fortune for some rich Arabs that had connections with our Administration (BTW - Bush Jr was on the board of a company called Harkin/Spectrum 7 that made a lot of money off that War too).
For more info check this:
http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

With so many past lies told, ans seeing that the War Machine was led by a former PR/Ad Executive, how can we believe them this time?

I look forward to your reply :)

[dakotagopher]

Overall I like W Bush (I think he's basically an honest, intelligent and forthright guy), but I don't support him on every issue. I still feel he was the best choice from the last election. I cringe when I think where we'd be if Mr. Gore had been in charge over past couple years. My opinion, I know others feel strongly the other way.

Any politician on the national level is going to set his agenda based on "political gain." Any polictian on that level is going to be "manipulative." That's the nature of politics at that level, they all seek to accomplish their agendas.

Obviously the gov't has lied and misled people in the past, and only time will tell if we have been lied to/misled this time. At this point, I haven't seen anything that really bothers me and I try to pay pretty close attention.

Also, the first Gulf War was about a bit more than oil (although Oil did play a role). Even if Kuwait hired PR firm to lobby for help, a sovereign nation was being raped (figuretively and literally speaking) and who besides the US could help?

Bush Sr. displayed some of the best leadership of the 20th century in booting Saddam out (even though Bush Sr.'s intel people played a part in causing the invasion in the first place; at least he had the will to fix the problem). Of course the resultant recession from the war cost him his second term, so it was not without a hight price for the guy.

If the public has been misled/lied to, it will come to light, and the public then has the opportunity to decide if they want change.

[jku]

Interesting. BTW, did you know one of the reasons the Iraqis have a hard time trusting America was because Bush Sr. completely betrayed the Kurds that were leading a successful revolt against Saddam? Did you know the reason we allowed 1000s to be slaughtered after Bush pulled out in 1991 was because "Hussein was a known 'threat' to the American public, and we didn't know who would take his place." Bush also had a very friendly relationship with Saddam Hussein for 20+ years prior to the Gulf War I. Don't you think that if Bush Sr was truly a "great and courageous leader," as revisionist historians from the right would like you to believe, that he would have taken care of Saddam in the beginning?

The trail of deception is long and broad in this administration, and his fathers. The list of policies that go against the very basic tenets of democracy and a free society are in danger. In times like this, there will always be ideological lines drawn based a variety of reasons. Conservatives like to see things in overly simple terms: black and white, because it sells well and gets votes. Progressives view things as many shades of gray, which is how 99% of life often is.

How we were raised is a big issue. My parents are split on Bush - Dad likes him, Mom loathes him. (my Dad worked for Boeing, NASA, MCD, for a lot of years and had a front row seat on some of the biggest wastes of taxpayer money - but the environment was pro-GOP because that was who was lobbied to get the huge contracts). I'm sure your parents fostered the development of your political views as well.

There is a two-fold reason often times to why some of the staggering abuses under Bush aren't given more media attention - thus the "outrage of the people" doesn't happen.
The first is that complicated issues that are hard to grasp don't play well in the profit driven modern mass media - in contrast, SEX with a President is very easy to understand. How many people can debate an issue as complex as tax cuts, the Pentagon budget insanity, the drug "war," and terrorism - without getting totally emotional and out of bend? How many people really care?

The "Clear Skies Act" is a good example of how his corruption impacts our lives. Bush's solution to clean air is to allow companies to 'voluntarily' pay to clean up the air they pollute. No punishment if you don't. Screw the kids that have asthma and birth defects, he doesn't have to raise them. How many people understand this basic level of duplicity is happening in their backyard?

On the media and outrage...

If you ever get a powerful news executive to speak off the record, you'll come across something very sad. They have lost their faith in the public to make decisions that are good for themselves. As one exec put it, "the public is fucking stupid."

One of the most popular songs recently was by Toby Keith, which had the line"we're gonna stick boot up their ass." One of the most popular movies recently was "Bringing Down The House."
The collective intellect and conciousness of America is under tremendous threat by the likes of Toby Keith and Queen Latifah - arguably more so than Bin Laden. We are not challenged anymore - laziness and sloth is celebrated. Stupidity is placed in the pantheon. The Jackass guys will make more money than many well-educated people on this list put together. It's a ripe to take advantage of trusting Americans.

Considering that thought and understanding of issues is looked at as pretentious and arrogant, what can anyone who truly wants to improve this country do to get Americans to "GET IT."

Papers NEED to be sold. You have to watch our TV shows so we can make billions of dollars. The machine must be fed with the jaded, worn-out minds of hard working Americans. The REAL issues are ignored, because a News Executive is judged by ratings, NOT content.

You are told to be outraged by what they want you to be outraged by. It's as simple as that. Thinking for yourself is not the goal of modern American society.

And it will be the end of our glorious nation if these trends continue. The dumbing down of America is led by Bush, and at the same time he uses it to push through laws that benefit a VERY small minority of VERY powerful and wealthy people - the average middle class American be damned.

Are these concepts clear in the minds of Americans? If they aren't, who benefits?