Perino punts on Pentagon Pundit propaganda

It’s been nearly two weeks since the New York Times first reported on a Pentagon program in which retired military officers, who’ve since become lobbyists or consultants for military contractors, were recruited to become propaganda agents of the Bush administration. Throughout the war in Iraq, these retired officers — or “message multipliers,” as they were described by internal Defense Department documents — took on roles as military analysts for all of the major news networks, without noting their puppet-like relationships with the Pentagon.

Given their complicity in the scandal, most of the major news networks have been reluctant to even mention the story to the public. The Washington Post’s Howard Kurtz, to his enormous credit, said the media’s “coverage of this important issue has been pathetic.” He added, “The story makes the networks look bad, and their response, by and large, has been to ignore it.”

But a few brave souls are doing their level best to keep the story alive. At yesterday’s White House press briefing, Raw Story reporter Eric Brewer had raised his hand to ask a question for quite a while. Dana Perino ignored him until others intervened, urging Perino to call on him.

Brewer, after noting that the retired officers’ access was cut off if they departed from the Pentagon’s talking points, asked, “[D]id the White House know about and approve of this operation?” Perino responded:

“Look, I didn’t know — look, I think that you guys should take a step back and look at this — look, DOD has made a decision, they’ve decided to stop this program. But I would say that one of the things that we try to do in the administration is get information out to a variety of people so that everybody else can call them and ask their opinion about something.

“And I don’t think that that should be against the law. And I think that it’s absolutely appropriate to provide information to people who are seeking it and are going to be providing their opinions on it. It doesn’t necessarily mean that all of those military analysts ever agreed with the administration. I think you can go back and look and think that a lot of their analysis was pretty tough on the administration. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t talk to people.”

And with that, she abruptly ended the press briefing.

Not surprisingly, there are a few problems with that response — starting with the fact that Perino doesn’t seem to know what the program was all about.

The press secretary’s spin makes it sound quite innocuous. The Defense Department, the White House story goes, was simply “proving information to people who are seeking it.” In turn, those people “provided their opinions on it.” What could possibly be controversial about that?

In reality, however, this was as sophisticated a media-manipulation scheme as anything the Bush gang has hatched to date. A small group of Pentagon political appointees would “cater to” more than 75 retired officers, giving them the message that needed to be multiplied. As one Pentagon official marveled, “You could see they were taking verbatim what the secretary was saying or what the technical specialists were saying. And they were saying it over and over and over. We were able to click on every single station and every one of our folks were up there delivering our message. You’d look at them and say, ‘This is working.'”

The Pentagon kept this program secret, and wouldn’t acknowledge its existence until it was forced to as a result of a lawsuit. If this was simply “proving information to people who are seeking it,” why, do you suppose, the Bush administration went to such lengths to keep it hidden from public view? If it was ethical and appropriate, why the need for secrecy?

What’s more, some of these retired officers were pressured to say things they knew to be false, but were driven by a financial incentive: they work for military contractors who couldn’t risk upsetting the Pentagon. So, the officers were given talking points, they repeated them on the air, and their employers continued to win lucrative contracts.

The goal was to “transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.” And, it worked, with these respected retired officers going on national television, without disclosing their role in the propaganda program, and insisting that Bush administration’s policies were working, even when they were failing.

The dishonesty of the program is rivaled only by the dishonesty of the White House’s response yesterday.

As for why it took a writer from Raw Story to press the White House press secretary on this, nearly two weeks after the revelations came to public light, that’s a question for ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox News to consider.

Oh My. Looks like there’s a raw nerve right there.

Time for some serious congressional hearings, which the corporate media can ignore at their own peril.

  • “Look, I didn’t know — look, I think that you guys should take a step back and look at this — look, DOD has made a decision, they’ve decided to stop this program.

    I still miss you, Scott McClellan, you saucy lil’ wordsmith, you.

  • Collusion often leads to insomnia. The personalities in the MSM are looking a bit haggard these days! -Kevo

  • The entire exchange was quite interesting. The Perinobot tried to make light of the question, tried to cast doubt on the Times without actually questioning their information, tried to shut down the information which underlies the question, and then employed the Chewbacca Defense* as she ran for the door.

    Q How about this gentleman’s question, Dana? How about him? He’s had his hand up all this time.

    MS. PERINO: Yes, I’m well aware. I am sure it will be a great question. Go ahead.

    Q The New York Times has reported that over the last —

    MS. PERINO: Definitely going to be a good question. (Laughter.)

    Q — over the last six years the Pentagon conducted a secret operation designed to sell the war in Iraq and the war on terror to the American people. It recruited more than 75 ex-military officers, many with financial ties to the defense industry, provided them with talking points and an extraordinary degree of access not available to ordinary members of the press, including meetings with the Secretary of Defense, and it got them higher supposedly independent military analysts by every U.S. television network. One of its participants described it —

    MS. PERINO: Do you have a question?

    Q One of its participants described the program as “psyops on steroids” and others said that if they —

    MS. PERINO: Is this your opinion?

    Q I’m describing the program.

    MS. PERINO: What’s your question?

    Q Others said that if they departed from the Pentagon’s talking points, their access was cut off. And my question is, did the White House know about and approve of this operation?

    MS. PERINO: Look, I didn’t know — look, I think that you guys should take a step back and look at this — look, DOD has made a decision, they’ve decided to stop this program. But I would say that one of the things that we try to do in the administration is get information out to a variety of people so that everybody else can call them and ask their opinion about something.

    And I don’t think that that should be against the law. And I think that it’s absolutely appropriate to provide information to people who are seeking it and are going to be providing their opinions on it. It doesn’t necessarily mean that all of those military analysts ever agreed with the administration. I think you can go back and look and think that a lot of their analysis was pretty tough on the administration. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t talk to people.

    Q Thank you.

    END 1:00 P.M. EDT

    That wasn’t a punt, that was the sound of a dam breaking.

    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

  • Perino doesn’t seem to know what the program was all about.

    Little Miss “What’s the Bay of Pigs?” doesn’t seem to know much at all. It wouldn’t surprise me if she has never had to feign ignorance.

    .

  • TPM links to a related DoD operation:

    At first glance, Mawtani.com looks like a conventional news website. Only the “about” link at the bottom of the site takes readers to a page that discloses the Pentagon sponsorship. The site, which has operated since October, is modeled on two long-established Pentagon-sponsored sites that offer native-language news for people in the Balkans and North Africa.

  • Well gosh darn it all, people—if the media ever decides to collectively “grow a pair” and ask questions like this on a daily basis, Perino’s daily “follies” would become an endangered species. Bush administration press conferences could become extinct. White House staffers like Dana would find themselves out in the cold; unloved and unwanted. DC area suicide rates would skyrocket, as Bushylvanian underlings flung themselves mercilessly into the Potomac River. The mass of bodies would float out to sea, block the shipping lanes, and create excessive detours for Exxon’s fleet of supertankers. Oil prices would go through the roof on speculations related to this threat to international shipping, Dick Cheney would blame it on al Quaida in Iran, and voila!—we’ll be bombing Tehran back into the Stone Age before you can fire up the in-home espresso machine.

  • As for why it took a writer from Raw Story to press the White House press secretary on this, nearly two weeks after the revelations came to public light, that’s a question for ABC, NBC, CBS, and Fox News to consider ignore.

    Fixed.

  • “If this was simply “proving information to people who are seeking it….”
    As indeed it was–culled, parsed, distorted, and fabricated information, but information all the same.

    Interesting (and surprising and encouraging) that someone else in the press corp forced her to acknowledge Mr. Brewer.

  • If you really want to wonk it up on this issue, I recommend Glen Greenwald’s discussion of the topic (CB’s link is only to a discussion of Kurtz, but there are some other great posts as well). He goes into the NBC conflict of interest (Subsidiary of GE, which has military contracts, etc.), and has a lot of in-depth information on the subject.

    PS- Kudos, CB, on the delicious alliteration.

  • Kudos, CB, on the delicious alliteration.

    Congratulations, CB, on the consonant coordination.

    Corrected!

  • For those who may be just joining us in the “reality based community”, when Perino says “I don’t think that [the Pentagon program] should be against the law”, she is, in all liklihood, referring to a pesky law which states that the United States government cannot engage in covert propaganda operations directed at the citizens of the United States:

    “Covert” propaganda, however, is illegal. Covert propaganda is defined as “materials such as editorials or other articles prepared by an agency or its contractors at the behest of the agency and circulated as the ostensible position of parties outside the agency.”

    The reason I believe that at least part of the Pentagon-uses-military-officers mess is illegal is this prohibition against “covert” propaganda. And the NYT expose outlines one instance where it appears the line of legality was crossed, for the same reason that the video news releases were illegal:

    Pentagon officials helped two Fox analysts, General McInerney and General Vallely, write an opinion article for The Wall Street Journal defending Mr. Rumsfeld.

    The military “analysts” did not disclose to the networks, the papers or the public that they were parroting the Bush party line or working in their defense. Instead, they were presented as “experts” — one assumes vetted for neutrality by the networks. We’re only now finding out that they were in fact paid to appear on TV, which turns them into …. what, exactly? … (no, not that) … a consultant? And were they paid to write op-eds as well?

    http://uspolitics.about.com/b/2008/04/21/pentagon-propaganda-may-have-been-illegal.htm

    IMO Perino probably has been advised that the program was illegal, so when the Raw Story reporter tried to find out if the whitehouse was aware of it and/or approved it, she ignored that question and tried to push the idea that the program was not illegal, as if she is qualified to say so. If she’s questioned again I’m pretty sure she’ll deny knowing much about the details of the deception, and at the same time will assert that it was legal, without saying who (in authority) has made that legal determination.

    IMO there’s strong indications that they are worried about the law catching up with them.

    see also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_Operations_(United_States)

  • PS- Kudos, CB, on the delicious alliteration.

    Darn, you beat me to it! 🙂

  • apologies for the post above, which has improper formatting on blockquotes in paragraphs 4 & 5.

  • Everyone should note that the oddball WorldNetDaily reporter Les Kinsolving* is credited with getting Perino to finally answer a question from Raw Story’s Eric Brewer, who had this very interesting bit to add about the corporate media’s ongoing coverup of this serious issue:

    And when you say, “That doesn’t mean we shouldn’t talk to people” who are “tough on the administration,” why won’t you talk to me unless Les Kinsolving forces you to?

    Afterwards, I thanked Les and had a good talk with fellow White House correspondent Helen Thomas. She advised me to keep coming, keep sticking my hand in the air, and, if I’m ignored, to speak up. None of the other journalists spoke to me, but one cameraman walking by said “Good work”.

    http://rawstory.com/news/2008/White_House_Blacklist_Breakthrough_Online_media_0430.html

    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Kinsolving

  • Watching the video, after Perino gives her evasive non-answer, she walks away as Eric Brewer asks his question again “Did the whitehouse know about the operation?

    There was no indication that the press conference was ending, other than Perino walking away from the podium.

    Someone needs to keep asking Brewer’s question.

  • Of course the WH knew about the operation, they initiated it. The DoD didn’t do anything that didn’t come from the WH. What difference does it make that it was illegal. Pelosi has already announced that there is no accountability for this WH. Congress could issue subpoenas and warrants but since the AG and the DoJ work for the Bush administration they will not enforce anything congress dictates. Mukasey himself is out there trying to get telecom immunity by outright lying about FISA and some pre 9/11 phone call that might have prevented the attack even bringing fake tears to add emotional support…straight out of some propaganda textbook.

    According to Pelosi it’s just detracting from policy making to hold these people accountable. Google “operation mockingbird” as this is where this DoD propaganda story begins. It is a CIA operation that they brag about and this proves it.

  • I still miss you, Scott McClellan, you saucy lil’ wordsmith, you. — 2weary4outrage

    Yeah, but if you use the mute button, she’s much better looking. It’s not as if you’d miss anything by not listening in either case.

  • The big news out of that press conference was when Perino said : “I don’t think that that should be illegal.” Meaning she knows full well that it is and was illegal.

    Well of course she doesn’t think it should be, it’s propaganda, she’s a propagandist, of course she would think that.

    I remember other stories when the WHPress Office has tried to de-credential Raw Story from the breifings. Just as the DoJ tried to get TPM kicked off it’s mailing lists. These people do not like being asked tough questions or in giving organizations with some institutional memory any sort of in. They know they will be caught out and will be asked hard questions.

    This is the same stuff they’ve pulled on Helen Thomas for 7+ years. And rememeber she asked about this last week and then berated her collegues for not asking any questions about it as well.

  • Pe4rino is the ultimate blond BIMBO. Only Bush , with his history of appointing idiots and incompetents would find her worthy of the position. Ever notice that women do most of the talking for him?

  • CB asks why NBC, ABC, CNN et al. haven’t been asking questions about this latest foul up… the reason is they were the networks that put these retired military officials on TV to spew their propaganda. Any reporting into said event would paint their hands red as knowing or unknowing pushers of that propaganda. Adding this situation, along with dozens of others, where the major media outlets passed along manipulated information for the benefit of the WH.

    By ignoring the story the networks and cable news stations wipe their hands clean of the problem that they’re a bunch of boobs easily manipulated

  • Comments are closed.