Transterrestrial Musings

Comments

Today's WaPo has commentary from a leaked Marine Corps intelligence report on Anbar Province. Very pessimistic findings contained therein. Says the insurgency cannot be contained there and that Al-Qaeda in Iraq is rapidly filling the vacuum due to the desperation of the Sunnis who fear annihilation at the hands of the Shia majority. Other intelligence sources dispute the Al-Qaeda aspect but support the determination that Anbar province is lost.

So yes, maybe there are incorrect stories, but please don't take that as evidence that we are even close to achieving anything that is either in the US interest or is a halfway decent solution for the people of Iraq.

Iraq remains the greatest foreign policy blunder in the history of the United States and exposing a few fake stories, while tittilating to some, don't change the basic facts on the ground.

Posted by AnonIraq at November 28, 2006 06:08 AM

I love how you never fail to take a thread off-topic.

"Iran remains the greatest foreign policy blunder in the history of the United States "

There, now its correct.

Posted by Mike Puckett at November 28, 2006 06:51 AM

> WaPo has commentary from a leaked Marine Corps intelligence report on Anbar Province.

How does AnonIraq know that this "leak" is accurate?

Apart, of course, from the fact that it supports his beliefs.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 28, 2006 08:24 AM

Of course Simberg is outraged by inaccurate reporting
from Iraq. Only the DoD is allowed to plant phony
stories in the Press. All this whining, and you will
never hear a single complaint from Simberg about
the Lincoln Group and their $100M propoganda
contract.

Posted by anonymous at November 28, 2006 08:52 AM

Anon spouts: All this whining, and you will
never hear a single complaint from Simberg about
the Lincoln Group and their $100M propoganda
contract.

All this accusation and still just black and white. Still can't admit that things happen that are good along with the things that are not.

You know, if the media does really put false stories in, I'll bet Anon bites completely since the painting will be bad for America. If the DOD puts in a false story, he'll bite again, yet be the first to call the DOD on the carpet when it becomes general knowledge that subterfuge occurred. However, once the media is found out to use flase stories (that Anon bit into) its STILL Bush's fault.

Posted by Mac at November 28, 2006 09:24 AM

Andy, apparently it's not a leak. Rather, selected excerpts have been released to the Post. So it's real and that it happens to agree with my views is besides the point.
Here's the link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/11/27/AR2006112701287.html

Posted by AnonIraq at November 28, 2006 09:28 AM

mac

It's fundamentally a violation of US policy to use propoganda.
If the iraqi's don't want to run stories, it's their call.
Bribing reporters to tell stories is a violation of US Law.
Armstrong Williams? Well, now he's a credible source these days.

I'm convinced Simberg is on the pay train.

Posted by anonymous at November 28, 2006 12:24 PM

I'm convinced Simberg is on the pay train.

And we're convinced that you're a moron. There's certainly a lot more evidence for it.

If I'm "on the pay train," the pay isn't very good. I'm still waiting for my first check.

Posted by Rand Simberg at November 28, 2006 12:33 PM

Anon says: It's fundamentally a violation of US policy to use propoganda.

A violation of policy may yet be a useful tool during wartime.

If the iraqi's don't want to run stories, it's their call.

If you want to get sucked into false reports, its your call?

Bribing reporters to tell stories is a violation of US Law.

Really, then what happened to Dan Rather?

Posted by Mac at November 28, 2006 12:38 PM

> Andy, apparently it's not a leak.

In other words, AnonIraq lied.

> Rather, selected excerpts have been released to the Post.

There's still the "is it authentic?" problem. Not to mention whether the "facts" cited in support of the conclusion are actually true and representative.

Would it be poor form to mention that AnonIraq has already told us that paid reports from the DoD are not to be believed? In other words, even if it is a real report, AnonIraq thinks that we shouldn't believe it because it was paid for by the DoD.

Or, is this report different because it agrees with AnonIraq's biases?

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 28, 2006 01:53 PM

> It's fundamentally a violation of US policy to use propoganda.

Feel free to cite any supporting evidence for that claim.

Follow up with a discussion of whether such a policy is a good ideal.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 28, 2006 01:55 PM

Andy, read the name of the poster carefully. "AnonIraq" is not the same as "anonymous," whoever that is. It's important to keep the anon's straight...!)

Posted by AnonIraq at November 28, 2006 02:13 PM

Andy

if you are too lazy to read US Law, I can't help you.

Posted by anonymous at November 28, 2006 02:17 PM

It's fundamentally a violation of US policy to use propoganda.

OMG, Congress appropriated funds for Commando Solo against the law. And what about all those tax benefits to television and radio stations for Public Service Announcements? Who knew this stuff?

Posted by Leland at November 28, 2006 02:41 PM

> if you are too lazy to read US Law, I can't help you.

I read lots of US Law - anonymous is simply lying about a blanket policy wrt propaganda.

Disagree? Provide cites.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 28, 2006 10:58 PM

At least there is a case now for Congress to quit funding PBS. It's against the law!

Posted by Leland at November 29, 2006 06:53 AM

It should be no surprise that the Left engages in lies, deceit, half-truths, distortions, obfuscation, omissions and fabrications as a matter of course and policy. This is in accordance with thier only principle: the ends justify the means.

Posted by nobody important at November 29, 2006 07:24 AM

> This is in accordance with thier only principle: the ends justify the means.

If the ends don't justify the means, what does?

The important thing to remember is that the means produce the ends. Intentions don't matter. Neither does the "goodness" of the participants.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 29, 2006 07:53 AM

Well, you could acquire a new car by purchasing it, or by hijacking a pregnant mother shooting her in the head.

Same end, a new car, quite different means.

You could gain political power through persuasion and the force of your arguments, or you could manipulate the public with fake news and fearmongering.

Posted by nobody important at November 29, 2006 08:13 AM

Nobody says: It should be no surprise that the Left engages in lies, deceit, half-truths, distortions, obfuscation, omissions and fabrications as a matter of course and policy.

to be fair, that's only some on the left, unfortunately, its those in the power positions as far as we can see. To be even more fair, Nobody's statement also applies to some on the right and in the middle. Its much more the norm than not in an election year. Neither side is doing much to correct it either.

Posted by Mac at November 29, 2006 08:42 AM

Andy

Try looking up the statutes on Covert Propoganda,
which the Bush Administration has been violating,
at least according to the GAO.

56 years of US law applies to this.

Posted by anonymous at November 29, 2006 12:42 PM

In other words, "anonymous" doesn't actually know what law restricts govt-funded propaganda, but is hoping to throw out some phrase that will send me on a wild goose chase.

I'm not biting. If "anonymous" has useful knowledge of an actual law, he can easily provide a cite.

Until he does, I'm calling him a liar.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 29, 2006 04:17 PM

The issue the GAO refers to was a Medicare ad. What Medicare has to do with Iraq is something only the moron can explain.

As for "Covert Propaganda", that would be US Code Title 31, Chapter 13, Paragraph 1355. Andy, don't bother looking that up, because it isn't actually in the code. Rather, it is HR 131, which is still in committee. One guess which party submitted the bill.

Our blog moron needs to listen to "School House Rock" on how a bill becomes law. Otherwise, your opinion of him is right on: he's lying.

Posted by Leland at November 29, 2006 05:28 PM

Correction: HR 373 (still in committee)

FYI: The authors are:
DeLauro, Waxman, Miller, McDermott, Slaughter.

Posted by Leland at November 29, 2006 05:30 PM

Freeman

epackaged news stories constitutes "covert propaganda" in violation of the publicity or propaganda prohibitions contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-199, div. F, title VI, 624, 118Stat. 3, 356 (Jan. 23, 2004) (fiscal year 2004); Consolidated Appropriations Resolution, 2003, Pub.L. No. 108-7, div.J, title VI, 626, 117 Stat. 11, 470 (Feb.20, 2003) (fiscal year 2003); and Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act, 2002, Pub. L. No.107-67, 626, 115 Stat. 514, 552 (Nov. 12, 2001) (fiscal year 2002).

See also B-302710, May 19, 2004:

So Freeman, does the existence of these cites make you
a neo-con cocksucker or just a lazy bastard.

Or better yet, just stupid?

Posted by anonymous at November 29, 2006 06:58 PM

Don't waste your time looking up the "Acts" and "Resolutions". The US Code still doesn't contain Paragraph 1355. Anyone can feel free to click the link and read what the US code says.

Then you can read the proposed HR 373.

No need to fling petty epithets and make wild accusations. The facts speak for themselves.

Just remember this is what started the tangent:
Of course Simberg is outraged by inaccurate reporting from Iraq. Only the DoD is allowed to plant phony stories in the Press.

And this is the follow up evidence support this accusation: B-302710, Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services --Video News Releases, May 19, 2004. From the link above for the US code, you can read paragraph 1341 which is the part of the code cited by the GAO. Nothing in the paragraph regards "covert" anything. Rather it says a civil servant cannot spend money on an activity that has yet to receive appropriations. In this case, DoH illegally advertised the "Medicare Prescription Drug" services prior to Congressional funding of that program.

I wonder what a search of Rand's blog would find on his feelings regarding Medicare.

Posted by Leland at November 30, 2006 06:29 AM

leland

if you don't know how to read GAO opinions, don't embarrass
yourself publicly.

Posted by anonymous at November 30, 2006 08:42 AM

latest from the Ap

Seeking further information about Friday's attack, an AP reporter contacted Hussein for a third time about the incident to confirm there was no error. The captain has been a regular source of police information for two years and had been visited by the AP reporter in his office at the police station on several occasions. The captain, who gave his full name as Jamil Gholaiem Hussein, said six people were indeed set on fire. . .

The attempt to question the existence of the known police officer who spoke to the AP is frankly ludicrous and hints at a certain level of desperation to dispute or suppress the facts of the incident in question.

Now if Leland and Simberg were to go to this mosque,
take pictures, take soil samples, do spectral analysis
on soils, interview locals, that would be something.

however, Simberg prefers sucking up to the RNC talking
points.

Posted by anonymous at November 30, 2006 08:44 AM

So the reporter "contacted Hussein" for the third time. Right, that seems to be thorough. How about getting his commanding officer's name and contacting him? Verify that Hussain is who he purports to be? And how about the names of the victims? Statements from family?

STOP LYING.

Posted by nobody important at November 30, 2006 08:50 AM

Our progressive friends are so gay-sensitive that they quickly resort to cocksucker as an insult. I wonder if "anonymous" will followup, as his kind so often do, with "nigger".

The law in question refers to domestic distribution. And then, it only bars that which is not authorized by Congress.

I'm pretty sure that Iraq isn't "domestic". And then there's the whole "authorization" thing. Since Congress gave Bush a blank check in Iraq, "authorization" isn't an issue.

Posted by Andy Freeman at November 30, 2006 09:06 AM

Freeman

Don't argue law, you just embarrass yourself.

And so quick to call someone a liar, well, don't be
surprised if people ask if you are just plain stupid.

Now if you were a real man, you'd apologize, but,
I'll never hear that.

Posted by anonymous at November 30, 2006 07:42 PM

The history is here for others to read. I'm certainly not embarrassed. I'm not the one who confused the Department of Health and Medicare with the Department of Defense and Iraq. Nor did I think a bill sitting in committee is the same as a law.

As for Andy:
The law in question refers to domestic distribution. And then, it only bars that which is not authorized by Congress.

Good catch. I missed the whole domestic vs foreign spending aspect. That means if HR 373 ever did see the light of day, it would still not cover Iraq or Department of Defense.

Posted by Leland at December 1, 2006 06:51 AM

Note that anonymous still hasn't cited any law, he's just referred to a GAO report discussing incidents which don't have anything to do with the issue at hand.

I suspect that he's getting discouraged; the quality of the namecalling is going down.

Posted by Andy Freeman at December 1, 2006 07:56 AM

Freeman

since you don't know how to read, i suggest you
walk down to congress, find the GAO, sit nice like
a nice boy and wait for someone to explain how
the law works.

http://www.democrats.reform.house.gov/Documents/20050222093810-51492.pdf

Posted by anonymous at December 1, 2006 02:23 PM

Anonymous seems to confuse dem position papers with actual laws.

Is that an improvment over misstating GAO reports?

Posted by Andy Freeman at December 1, 2006 09:42 PM

He also seems unable to use THOMAS.

I think he is hoping in the time it takes us to walk to the Capitol building, the Dems might get HR 373 voted and signed into law.

BTW, speaking of "covert propaganda", check out Anonymous link. What's this, a federally funded (.gov) website for the purpose of propagandizing Democrats effort on the committee of government reform. There is a link to Government Waste, Fraud, and Abuse. What a stunning piece of hypocrisy, but then it is hosted by Henry Waxman. Click here to report this site as a waste, fraud, and abuse of US taxpayers dollars. There is only one link the real House of Representative website, and none to the full committee website.

Perfect example of Democrat creating laws making things illegal for others, but not for them.

Posted by Leland at December 2, 2006 05:56 AM

"And so quick to call someone a liar, well, don't be
surprised if people ask if you are just plain stupid."

No one asks if you are stupid or a liar just as no one asks if the sun is hot or is water wet.

Both are self-evident.

Posted by Mike Puckett at December 2, 2006 09:25 AM

Post a comment