Our Military Has Been Stript Of Its Right To Speak

@gewcew23 (8010)
United States
June 13, 2008 9:15am CST
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. Do not worry this bill does not prevent Congress from spewing its propaganda, just the military. I was worried there for a minute, because without the propaganda from Nancy Pelosi my life would not have meaning.
2 people like this
4 responses
• United States
13 Jun 08
Don't worry this law will be unable to keep the Pentagon from consulting with retired members of the military for their advice and opinion. Then those retired members will still be free to work as pundits. There is good reason to believe DOD and the CIA have had these propaganda campaigns ongoing for many decades. They are not going to stop now.
2 people like this
@gewcew23 (8010)
• United States
13 Jun 08
The same day that the Supreme Court has give Gitmo detainees right, Congress strips the military of its rights. Does notmake any sense to me.
2 people like this
@ElaanR2 (277)
• United States
13 Jun 08
Consulting the retired military experts for advice is not wrong. However, it is when these military officers are told what to tell the press and the public that we do have a problem. That is what is being addressed by the law.
3 people like this
• United States
14 Jun 08
Yes, I'm aware of what the law is addressing. I'm telling you the law will be ineffective. Perhaps, there is some way to achieve the law's objective, but this is not it.
2 people like this
• United States
14 Jun 08
I'm not following - you're saying that it SHOULD be okay for the military to spread disinformation to the American public?
2 people like this
@anniepa (27279)
• United States
13 Jun 08
I happen to agree with this Amendment. I understand where your coming from about "Congress from spewing its propaganda" but we all know when a member of Congress speaks it's all political and obviously biased whichever way the speaker leans so we know up-front that it's propaganda in a sense. However, what was happening with these retired military analysts is they were presenting themselves as independent analysts when in fact they'd been getting their "instructions" from the Pentagon on what to say and not say. That would be well and good if the viewers were told the truth but instead they were getting what they thought was "unfiltered" news and it was actually what was being force-fed by the Administration. Annie
2 people like this
@Destiny007 (5820)
• United States
13 Jun 08
In other words they want to control the information we get. What else can you expect from a bunch of totalitarian communist wannabes?
1 person likes this
@gewcew23 (8010)
• United States
13 Jun 08
If they do not like the information Congress calls it propaganda. If they do like the information Congress calls it news.
1 person likes this
• United States
15 Jun 08
Actually, this was nothing more than an attempt to control the type of propaganda. They don't want these retired military types to say anything that the politburo... er ... Congress has not approved, because Congress wants to control our information. That is also why certain factions are trying to restart that Fairness Doctrine, so that the conservatives no longer have a voice against the communists.