See? The US is wrong again! LOL!

Rumsfeld Alters Claim on Planting Iraqi Stories

LA Times:

Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said the Pentagon was reviewing its practice of paying to plant stories in the Iraqi news media, withdrawing his earlier claim that it had been stopped.

Rumsfeld said he was mistaken in the earlier assertion.

I’ve always been a bit confused about this story. Are the stories we’ve been pushing false stories?


  1. Someone correct me if I’m wrong here. It wasn’t my impression that the stories were false, but that there is great opposition in the muslim media to the infidels injecting articles into muslim newspapers. The Army pays off the newspapers, and runs the article under a arabic pen name, IIRC. Its been seen as a small price to pay to get the good news into the papers over there.

  2. Someone correct me if I’m wrong here I will. Why is the Army paying off newspapers to plant stories and hiding behind pen names. That is deception plane and simple. Why doesn’t the army come out and say that they are the source

  3. Torcik, Because some of the elements in Iraq (just like here in the states) will say that it’s propaganda, and obviously false, even if the story is written factually, and with proof. The army has a column of news items on their web site, and I swear I’ve never seen one of those articles picked up by the AP, or run in my hometown paper. If it’s written by the Army ‘it’s propoganda’ and therefore will not be believed. I’d love for someone to give the Soldiers their due, but you won’t see it running on the news because it’s ‘propoganda’ (or published by the Army). That’s the reason for the pen name. They pay the Iraqi editors to run the story because the editors are in personal danger of being killed to put these things in their paper. I’d say that it’s only right to pay a guy/gal for doing something that may get them killed if they don’t want to do it for free. As to pen names, Ben Franklin used one, and so have many others, not to deceive, but to protect themselves. Heck, I wished I would’ve used one after my last letter to the editor of my hometown paper. You should’ve seen the unsigned, no return address, vitriolic letters I got. I’d use a pen name too, under the circumstances.

  4. torcik: My question in the post and Chase’s statement (which you pretended to ‘correct’) were both about the truth or untruth of the stories being run. You haven’t addressed that yet. I’m just saying.

  5. Due to current international conditions I have limited my news-stand selection to one published information source: MAD MAGAZINE!

  6. The majority of the press is moonbat powered. Therefore dissenting opinion is blocked out .. call it an ‘editorial decision’. That of essence makes it propaganda. They also slant what they do print, as an example I submit — ‘There is little substance to the rumor that Congressman Murtha is having an affair with one of his male staffers who is in the employ of the Saudis.’ By doing this I ‘create ‘ the rumor in print, even while I deny it. Damage is still done, especially when I flood the paper with similar BS articles. ‘Progaganda must not serve the truth, especially insofar as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent.’. Adolf Hitler: Mein Kampf. British Foreign Policy Association translation, 1935. p.260, 14th Edition. In the press and media, that is the enemy. That is the reality of what they do in black and white. It is the job of the military to counter the enemy. I would imagine that what the military could be called propaganda in that it shows them in a favorable light. They must, however take great care to get the facts right lest they be ‘burned big time’ and destroy what it is they are attempting to do. What the military is doing, in my mind, is part of warfighting. Moonbats call it wrong. I say even if it is– it stiff fits the template of ‘disinformation’ which is a legitimate job of the military. So guys continue to march, roll the presses, roll the cameras and get some.

  7. I wasn’t commenting about the morally right or wrong aspect of the Army injecting it’s own articles into the Muslim media, just the facts about how it was done and the ‘why’ I had heard behind it. Now, I will comment on the rightness of it. The left, and by proxy, the media, have always been against us in the military. We are seen as being too stupid or servile to do anything else, and when the left, and by proxy, the media, pretend to care about our well being, it is in the furtherance of their political goals. The Andrews AFB casket pictures, and the media’s apparent concern over the numbers of our military dead and wounded in Iraq and Afganistan would be the most recent and glaring examples. When the 2000th KIA military member is seen as news-worthy to the point that you cannot escape it in any form of the media, and the 1000th elementary school being built by the US military is not, you have a problem. When you are out of options, you find a way. Not only is our own media against us, but the muslim media is probably as much, or more so. The Army is doing the best they have with a terrible situation. The only thing unusual here is the article has a pen name, and a little baksheesh has changed hands. Considering how high the deck is actually stacked against the Army, I can certainly understand why they have chosen the route they did.