|
Banned
|
<b>Do we even have to wonder why they "come for" Kerry now?</b> This is just another chickenhawk, bullshit psy-op to take the focus away from where it rightfully belongs....we're supposed to be "at war", since 9/11/2001....and here is the "record" of your "able" CIC:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...123001326.html
Down on the Ranch, President Wages War on the Underbrush
Bush Conscripts Aides in Tireless Pursuit of Clearing Ground
By Lisa Rein
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, December 31, 2005; Page A03
CRAWFORD, Tex., Dec. 30 -- On most of the 365 days he has enjoyed at his secluded ranch here, President Bush's idea of paradise is to hop in his white Ford pickup truck in jeans and work boots, drive to a stand of cedars, and whack the trees to the ground.
If the soil is moist enough, he will light a match and burn the wood. If it is parched, as it is across Texas now, the wood will sit in piles scattered over the 1,600-acre spread until it is safe for a ranch hand to torch -- or until the president can come home and do the honors himself.
[<i>President Bush, shown clearing cedar at his Crawford, Tex., ranch in 2002, has not lost his enthusiasm for the task during recent trips to what aides call the Western White House.
President Bush, shown clearing cedar at his Crawford, Tex., ranch in 2002, has not lost his enthusiasm for the task during recent trips to what aides call the Western White House. (By Eric Draper -- White House)</i>]
Sometimes this activity is the only official news to come out of what aides call the Western White House. <h3>For five straight days since Monday</h3>, when Bush retreated to the ranch for his Christmas sojourn, a spokesman has announced that the president, in between intelligence briefings, calls to advisers and bicycling, has spent much of his day clearing brush.....
|
....and this year....he works....prosecuting the GWOT, while some troops serve four tours in Iraq....when is he working? He's perprtually campaigning, never spends time at his desk, in Washington....and you believe Kerry is insulting the troops?
Quote:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/bus...278141637.html
Michael Gawenda in Washington
November 1, 2006
Page 1 of 2 | Single page
ANALYSIS
BY TURNING chaos in Iraq into an election platform, George Bush has criticised the Democrats for a lack of initiative on fighting the war and on their security and domestic policies.
With only a week to go before midterm congressional elections that will shape the last two years of his presidency, Bush is on the campaign trail doing what he loves best: talking to ordinary Americans. <b>His stop at a small university in Statesboro, Georgia</b> looked like an old-fashioned campaign rally - flags flying, placards bobbing up and down, Bush in an open-necked blue shirt with his sleeves rolled up, flaying the Democrats to thunderous applause.
That the crowd loved him is not surprising, given Bush rallies are stage-managed down to the smallest detail, and audience members are closely vetted by White House officials.
Bush's senior adviser and the Republican Party's chief strategist, Karl Rove, has told the party that to give Republicans the best chance of holding on to both houses of Congress they should paint the Democrats as weak on national security, as the party of "cut and run" on Iraq, and the party of gay marriage and other social evils.
"If you listen carefully for a Democrat plan for success in Iraq, they don't have one," Bush proclaimed to a standing ovation.
"Iraq is the central front in the war on terror, yet they don't have a plan for victory."
On gay marriage, Bush insisted that only Republicans would support traditional families from the "judges who want to legislate from the bench" - a reference to the New Jersey Supreme Court's decision last week that gay couples are entitled to to the same rights as heterosexual couples.
More rapturous applause.
But why is Bush campaigning in Republican strongholds such as Georgia and his home state of Texas rather than the states that will decide the election outcomes, such as Ohio and Missouri?
The White House strategists, Rove in particular, believe that the best - and maybe the only - chance the Republicans have of avoiding an election debacle next week is to convince the party's conservative "values" base that if the Democrats win control of Congress, the world will come to an end.
That explains why Bush and the Vice-President, Dick Cheney, seem to be doing an interview a day on White House-friendly Fox cable news, which is the media outlet of choice of Christian conservative Republicans.
<b>But most Republicans in tough races do not want Bush campaigning for them. With his approval rating stuck below 40 per cent in most polls, he is a liability.</b>
|
<b>and the next day, yesterday, Bush flew right back to.....Georgia !</b>
Quote:
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/...OL_US_Bush.php
Campaigning for Republicans in election's final days, Bush hits hard at gay marriage
The Associated Press
Published: October 30, 2006
STATESBORO, Georgia President George W. Bush has tried for months to define the Nov. 7 congressional elections as a choice about two issues: taxes and terrorism. Now, with polls predicting bleak results for Republicans, he is trying to fire up his party by decrying gay marriage......
.....On Tuesday, Bush is heading back to Georgia, a state he twice won comfortably. Tuesday's rally is aimed at helping another Republican former congressman, Mac Collins, oust Democratic Congressman Jim Marshall........
|
<b>When Mr. Bush wasn't away from Washington...clearing brush....for 365 days out of five years.....or away campaigning.....he was addressing the troops, as he did last veterans day.....but he wasn't even straightforward, with them:</b>
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111101832.html
Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument
By Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, November 12, 2005; Page A01
President Bush and his national security adviser have answered critics of the Iraq war in recent days with a two-pronged argument: that Congress saw the same intelligence the administration did before the war, and that independent commissions have determined that the administration did not misrepresent the intelligence.
<b>Neither assertion is wholly accurate</b>........
|
....Mr. Bush's military record:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Sep11.html
Gaps in Service Continue to Dog Bush
By Michael Dobbs
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 12, 2004; Page A08
President Bush's military records, including personal flight logs just released by the Pentagon, paint a picture of a solid, if hardly outstanding, pilot who energetically performed his duties for much of a six-year stint with the Air National Guard. Then, in the spring of 1972, the picture changes....
..... A review of the authenticated documentary record for Bush's guard service and interviews with former guard members suggest that the president and his aides have been less than fully candid about unexplained gaps in his military service, and have made misleading and sometimes inaccurate statements that have helped fuel the controversy.
At the same time, Bush's critics have been unable to come up with definitive evidence showing that he failed to meet his minimum obligations to the guard after being suspended from flying for failing to take the physical. .......
.....Whatever Bush's reasons for failing to take the physical, he seems to have put in minimal service at best in Alabama. According to his official personnel records, made public by the White House and the Pentagon, he failed to show for any drills between May and October 1972, even though Air Force regulations required him to attend 90 percent of scheduled drills, barring events "beyond his control."......
...The records contradict the claims of a former Alabama National Guard officer, John B. "Bill" Calhoun, who came forward earlier this year at the behest of "a Republican close to Bush" to testify to vivid memories of Bush taking part in drills during the period in question. <b>No credible witness has come forward to say Bush was seen performing guard duties in Alabama, despite a $10,000 reward offered by "Doonesbury" cartoonist Garry Trudeau.....</b>
|
<b>Compare the deceitful "mess", above, to Mr. Kerry's record, and tell me that this media blitz is not a carefully coordinated republican effort to shift the focus from Mr. Bush's failed leadership and illegal disaster of an invasion and occupation of Iraq, from Mr. Bush....to Mr. Kerry:</b>
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/31/wa...rtner=homepage
Kerry and G.O.P. Spar Over Iraq Remarks
Article Tools Sponsored By
By DAVID STOUT
Published: October 31, 2006
......Mr. Bush stepped up the language on Iraq on Monday while campaigning for Republican candidates in Georgia and Texas. “However they put it, the Democrat approach in Iraq comes down to this,” he said. “The terrorists win and America loses.”
Part of Mr. Kerry’s outrage may arise from memories of 2004, when a group called Swift Boat Veterans for Truth raised allegations, never substantiated, that he had exaggerated his wartime exploits. Some political observers thought Mr. Kerry and his allies were too slow to strike back at his attackers.
This time, Mr. Kerry did not wait. <b>“No Democrat will be bullied by an administration that has a cut-and-run policy in Afghanistan and a stand-still-and-lose strategy in Iraq,”</b> he said in his statement. At his news conference, he accused Republicans of creating “straw men” because “they’re afraid to debate real men.”
|
John Kerry had no trouble verifying his own military service....from a credible fellow Naval officer who served alongside Kerry, in combat in Vietnam:
Quote:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/l...ck=1&cset=true
Swift boat skipper: Kerry critics wrong
Tribune editor breaks long silence on Kerry record; fought in disputed battle
By Tim Jones, Tribune national correspondent. Tribune staff reporter Rick Pearson contributed to this report from Crawford, Texas
Published August 22, 2004
The commander of a Navy swift boat who served alongside Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry during the Vietnam War stepped forward Saturday to dispute attacks challenging Kerry's integrity and war record.
William Rood, an editor on the Chicago Tribune's metropolitan desk, <b>said he broke 35 years of silence about the Feb. 28, 1969, mission that resulted in Kerry's receiving a Silver Star because recent portrayals of Kerry's actions published in the best-selling book "Unfit for Command" are wrong and smear the reputations of veterans who served with Kerry.</b>
Rood, who commanded one of three swift boats during that 1969 mission, said that Kerry came under rocket and automatic weapons fire from Viet Cong forces and that Kerry devised an aggressive attack strategy that was praised by their superiors.
He called allegations that Kerry's accomplishments were "overblown" untrue.....
|
<b>Before you post a reply laced with republican talking points that demand a Kerry "apology to the troops".....consider that the folks who Kerry referred to are the "clay" molded by the Bush era neocons, into the enlistees who end up in the rank and file who serve, and die....in our military, in Iraq. Would many educated people "volunteer" to serve four tours as a combat E-4 in Iraq, if they weren't given a helping....or two....of tax funded psy-op?</b>
They think that we're stupid fucks....that we'll believe everything that they tell us....enough of us, anyway.....and....they've been right....They know their constituency, and, how to reach them, how to turn them.....
<b>Here is how they "do it":</b>
Quote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/6101178.stm
Tuesday, 31 October 2006, 10:38 GMT
Iraq violence 'linked to US vote'
Relatives embrace in front of coffin of US soldier Andrew Patton
Increasing numbers of Americans want troops to start coming home
US Vice-President Dick Cheney has said that insurgents in Iraq have increased their attacks in order to influence the upcoming US mid-term elections.
He blamed a recent rise in violence on al-Qaeda and others trying to "break the will of the American people".......
.........<b>Propaganda unit</b>
Pentagon spokesman Eric Ruff has echoed the vice-president, saying that the militants are trying to "increase opposition to the war and have an influence against the president".
Their comments come amid one of the worst months of violence since the war began, which has claimed the lives of 101 US troops and many more Iraqis.
The upturn in violence also coincided with the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which Mr Cheney said could have been a contributory factor.
Despite the violence, the BBC's Justin Webb in Washington says that the Bush administration does not believe the true picture of events in Iraq has been made public.
The White House is particularly concerned that insurgents are using the internet to disseminate their message and give the impression they are more powerful than the US, our correspondent says.
In response the US defence department has set up a new unit to better promote its message across 24-hour rolling news outlets, and particularly on the internet.
The Pentagon said the move would boost its ability to counter "inaccurate" news stories and exploit new media.
<b>'Set the record straight'</b>
Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said earlier this year the US was losing the propaganda war to its enemies.
The newly-established unit will use "new media" channels to push its message and "set the record straight", the Pentagon's Mr Ruff said.
"We're looking at being quicker to respond to breaking news, being quicker to respond, frankly, to inaccurate statements," he said.
A Pentagon memo seen by the Associated Press news agency said the new unit would "develop messages" for the 24-hour news cycle and aim to "correct the record".
The unit would reportedly monitor media such as web logs and would also employ "surrogates", or top politicians or lobbyists who could be interviewed on TV and radio shows.
Mr Ruff said the move to set up the unit had not been prompted either by the eroding public support in the US for the Iraq war or the US mid-term elections next week.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sinclair Lewis (1917)
Fascism will come to America wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.
|
Quote:
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/politic...ents/truth.pdf
(page 1)
Truth from These Podia
<b>Summary of a Study of Strategic Influence, Perception Management,
Strategic Information Warfare and Strategic Psychological Operations
in Gulf II</b>
Sam Gardiner1
Colonel, USAF (Retired)
October 8, 2003
1 The author has taught strategy and military operations at the National War College, Air
War College and Naval War College. He was recently a visiting scholar at the Swedish
Defence College. During Gulf II he was a regular on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer as
well as on BBC radio and television, and National Public Radio.
The study was not funded by any organization, and the author’s arguments are not meant
to represent those of any organization.
He can be reached at SamGard@aol.com
(page 3)
.....It was not bad intelligence. It was much more. It was an orchestrated effort. It
began before the war, was a major effort during the war and continues as post-conflict
distortions.
The title of this study was difficult for me. When I began I thought it was going
to be an analysis of Pentagon spin. I was going to call it, “Truth from this Podium.” That
was to be a play on promises we were given before the war. The more I did, the more it
became clear that it was not just the Pentagon. It was the White House, and it was
Number 10 Downing Street. It was more than spin.
I though about calling it “Apparatus of Lies,” connecting to a title the White
House gave a paper on Iraq’s decade of fabrication, mostly about weapons of destruction.
Although lies were part of the effort, that title would have been off the mark because the
story is more about aversion to truth rather than the open lie.
I also missed on the subject. I thought it was going to be about spinning the
stories of the conflict. I was wrong. The real essence of what I found was a much
broader problem. It is a problem about the future as much as the past. This problem
became the story of the study.
This is one way of summarizing the study:
2
The United States (and UK) conducted a strategic
influence campaign that:
• …distorted perceptions of the situation both
before and during the conflict.
• …caused misdirection of portions of the military
operation.
• …was irresponsible in parts.
• …might have been illegal in some ways.
• …cost big bucks.
• …will be even more serious in the future.
I know what I am suggesting is serious. I did not come to these conclusions
lightly. Because my plea is for truth in war, I have tried to be very careful not to fall into
a trap of describing exaggerations with exaggeration. I hope I’ve done that. I expect
some will believe I have been guilty of the same sins. As long as we can have some
discussion about truth in war, I accept the criticism.
(page 4)
Truth from These Podia
You will see in my analysis and comments that I do not accept the notion that the
first casualty of war is truth. I think we have to have a higher standard.
In the most basic sense, Washington and London did not trust the peoples of their
democracies to come to right decisions. Truth became a casualty. When truth is a
casualty, democracy receives collateral damage.
My plea is for truth. I believe we have to find ways to restore truth as currency of
government in matters as serious as war. My story would be important if it were the last
chapter of the book. It’s not. There is more to come. As the United States struggles with
a post-conflict Iraq, distortions continue. Probably of more concern, major players in the
game are working on ways to do it “better” in future conflicts.
In other words, it appears as if the issues of this war will become even more
important for future wars. We have reason to be concerned.
Another way to summarize the study:
Summary
• Clearly, the assumption of some in the government is the people
of the United States and the United Kingdom will come to a
wrong decision if they are the given truth.
• We probably have taken “Information Warfare” too far.
• We allowed strategic psychological operations to.
become part of public affairs.
• We failed to make adequate distinction between strategic
influence stuff and intelligence.
• Message became more important than performance.
3
The concepts of warfare got all mixed up in this war. I’ll come back to this
subject later, but what has happened is that information warfare, strategic influence,
strategic psychological operations pushed their way into the important process of
informing the peoples of our two democracies. The United States and the UK got too
good at the concepts they had been developing for future warfare.
The best way to describe my methodology is to use words that came from
Admiral Poindexter’s unfunded project, Total Information Awareness, later known as
Terrorism Information Awareness. What I have done is look for “inconsistencies in open
source data with regard to known facts…and goals.”.....
|
|