war/peace

The managing editor of the New York Times, Jill Abramson, has admitted in a lengthy review of Bob Woodward's latest book that the Times failed to publish enough front-page articles questioning the prewar intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Midway through her 3,000-plus word review of "The War Within," Bob Woodward's latest book about George W. Bush's presidency, Abramson writes, "In 'Plan of Attack' Woodward acknowledges an error of his own: he admits he should have pushed The Washington Post to publish a front-page article about the flimsiness of the intelligence on W.M.D. I was Washington bureau chief for The Times while this was happening, and I failed to push hard enough for an almost identical, skeptical article, written by James Risen. This was a period when there were too many credulous accounts of the administration's claims about Iraq's W.M.D. (including some published in The Times and The Post)." Abramson admitted that at the time she "failed to grasp" the importance and the urgency of Risen's article.

The U.S. Defense Department has awarded its up to three-year, $300 million contract for "information operations" in Iraq and possibly Afghanistan. There are four lucky firms: the Lincoln Group, which was outed in 2005 for planting U.S. military-written pieces in Iraqi newspapers; Leonie Industries, a woman-owned company that promises "access to seemingly impenetrable markets" around the world; SOS International, which in 2006 won a contract to monitor foreign media for coverage of the so-called Global War on Terrorism; and MPRI, a unit of L-3 Communications that won a contract in 2003 to involve former Iraqi soldiers in public works projects. The new PR push is "seen by the [U.S.] military as a means toward 'reconciliation' of the country and a way to foster support for Iraqi Security Forces from Iraqi civilians," reports O'Dwyer's.

Soldiers guarding pallets of money in IraqOver $13 billion that the U.S. sent to Iraq to pay for reconstruction projects has been wasted, stolen or diverted to al-Qaeda in Iraq, according to Salam Adhoob, a former chief investigator for Iraq's Commission on Public Integrity. Adhoob worked for the Commission for three years, where he oversaw 200 employees. He testified about the waste, fraud and diversion of U.S. funds before the Senate Democratic Policy Committee. He told the panel that some of the investigations his and other agencies conducted uncovered "ghost projects" that never existed, or instances in which Iraqi and U.S. contractors did poor-quality work. In one case, Adhoob said that the U.S. had spent $24.4 million on an electricity project in Nineveh province, but that an oversight agency found that it "existed only on paper." He reported that he had a "firsthand, up-close look at corruption" and waste of U.S. funds, and that he eventually was forced to flee Iraq because of death threats.

Two years ago, public revulsion against the Bush Administration's unnecessary and disastrous attack and occupation of Iraq resulted in the Democratic Party taking control of the U.S. Congress. But Nancy Pelosi and the new political leadership backed down before President Bush and refused to withhold funding for the war, while rhetorically denouncing it and thus playing to anti-war voters. The liberal lobby group MoveOn spent tens of millions of dollars on anti-war advertisements and door-to-door canvassing events as part of its partisan campaign to blame the war on the Republicans, while letting Democrats off the hook for giving Bush all the money he wanted to continue the occupation into next year.

Today, as the 2008 election approaches, worry over Iraq has slipped down the public's list of concerns while more immediate economic issues and the spectacular collapse of the Wall Street investment banks take center stage. However, one anti-war organization has proven especially tenacious, independent and committed to immediately bringing home troops from Iraq and making good to the Iraqi people, while taking care of the soldiers who fought the war. That organization is the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) composed of more than thirteen hundred soldiers who have recently served or are still serving in the U.S. military.

Sears-Army clothing logo (from Advertising Age)Sears has entered into a first-ever deal with the United States Military to market a new line of officially sanctioned, military-styled clothing to men, women and boys. The military has officially licensed a "soldier chic" line of clothing to Sears called the "All American Army Brand First Infantry Division" collection. The garb, to be launched in 550 Sears stores in October -- just in time for the holiday season -- consists of "authentic lifestyle reinterpretations" of regulation uniforms and military-issued gear like T-shirts, hooded sweatshirts, denim and other outerwear. The partnership is part of a marketing strategy to raise the public profile of the U.S. military. Sears already carries some military-themed merchandise on its Web site, like a Modern Military Figure Special Forces Soldier toy for ages 8 and up, a musical DVD titled "Death Chants, Breakdowns and Military Waltzes, Vol. 2," which lists song titles like "Cadaver Recovery Man" and "Mud & Guts," and a Self-esteem Zip Military Style Vest for Juniors.

In an attempt to "taint the al-Qaida brand," a British counter-terrorism unit has targeted the BBC and other domestic media outlets. A report from the UK research, information and communications unit described efforts to discredit al-Qaida (AQ) by promoting messages that the terrorist group is losing support, that "they are not heroes and don't have answers," and that "they harm you, your country and your livelihood." The unit is mostly sending information to "overseas communicators" such as British embassy and consulate staffers and others "working with overseas influencers and opinion formers." But the counter-terrorism report adds: "We are pushing this material to UK media channels, eg, a BBC radio programme exposing tensions between AQ leadership and supporters. And a restricted working group will communicate niche messages through media and non-media." The report also advocates using new media to "channel messages through volunteers in internet forums." The counter-terrorism unit's material "is a mixture of recent news reports and articles from Arabic, Middle Eastern and North African news sources illustrating the theme of 'AQ is in decline' as well as articles from the New York Times, the Observer, Newsweek and American websites," reports Alan Travis.

Prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Bush administration officials exaggerated what U.S. intelligence agencies were reporting about Iraqi weapons, according to Congressional investigations. But even before that exaggeration, the intelligence reports had been skewed by an administration eager for war, according to recently declassified documents. For example, the CIA's white paper on "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Program" was supposedly based on the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE). But drafts of the CIA paper existed in July 2002, "long before the NIE was even requested by Congress." There are few differences between the early draft and final paper, mostly made "to insert more charges" about Iraqi weapons activities, "or to sharpen them. ... Little of the text shows the kind of approach characteristic of intelligence analysis." An early draft of a September 2002 British paper on Iraqi weapons shows that its claims were also made "even more somber," suggesting that "the Bush administration and the Tony Blair government began acting in concert to build support for an invasion of Iraq two to three months earlier than previously understood." U.S. intelligence agencies' use of information from the anti-Saddam Hussein exile group Iraqi National Congress -- and their dismissal of more reliable sources saying there were no Iraqi WMDs -- "most likely flows directly from the prodding ... by high levels at the Pentagon and White House," concludes the National Security Archive.

Wounded Iraqi child (U.S. Army picture)The U.S. military is in the process of hiring a public relations firm to help it carry out "information operations" in Iraq, "to counter insurgent misinformation tactics." An Army public affairs officer said the goal of the work is to communicate "with people in Iraq in as many ways [as] possible what we're trying to do to help them, and what we're trying to do to prevent people from using these ruthless roadside bombs that blow up people in streets, in schools, and mosques." The one-year contract may be extended for up to three years and cost up to $300 million. "Public affairs executives speaking on background said the contract has elicited a lot of attention from Washington agencies because of its potential size," reports PR Week, "but that firms with previous experience working in dangerous, high-security environments in Iraq -- such as Lincoln Group, The Rendon Group and MPRI -- would have an inside track on winning the bid."

The morning of June 20, 2006, an email message circulated amongst U.S. Defense Department officials.

"Jed Babbin, one of our military analysts, is hosting the Michael Medved nationally syndicated radio show this afternoon. He would like to see if General [George W.] Casey would be available for a phone interview," the Pentagon staffer wrote. "This would be a softball interview and the show is 8th or 9th in the nation."

Why would the Pentagon help set up a radio interview? And how did they know that the interview would be "softball"?

From early 2002 to April 2008, the Defense Department offered talking points, organized trips to places such as Iraq and Guantanamo Bay, and gave private briefings to a legion of retired military officers working as media pundits. The Pentagon's military analyst program, a covert effort to promote a positive image of the Bush administration's wartime performance, was a multi-level campaign involving quite a few colorful characters.

Flipping through the over 8,000 pages of documents released in connection with the program, one Pentagon pundit arguably steals the spotlight: Jed Babbin.

Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's "Daily Show"An article in the New York Times asks whether Jon Stewart of Comedy Central's Daily Show has become the most trusted man in America, pointing out that his fake news comedy show has emerged in recent years as a "genuine cultural and political force." While 24-hour news networks like FOX, MSNBC and CNN have been pumping out infotainment-style news about topics like dead celebrities and sexual predators, the Daily Show has been critically tracking the cherry-picking of prewar intelligence, the politicization of the Department of Justice and the efforts of the Bush Administration to increase the power of the executive branch. Stewart has proven to be a master at calling out government and corporate spin, hypocrisy and red herrings, and helping his audience see them, too. A 2008 study from the Project for Excellence in Journalism at the Pew Research Enter for the People and the Press found that the Daily Show has had an impact on American dialogue and that it is "getting people to think critically about the public square."