Gjelten: "...A General wants to be a military analyst on NPR or some other news organization in order to curry favor with the Department of Defense which in turn will benefit him in his defense contracting. That's a hypothetical scenario we have to be concerned about."In reply to which, I sent the following message:
"ONE of the scenarios, Tom. Another could well be that a retired general, still following Pentagon orders ("there are no 'ex-Marines.'"), slithers into the Media (NPR--You can't spell 'RePublicaN' without NPR--ABC, NBC, Faux, CNN, all the rest which, if viewed with any kind of detachment at all, MUST be understood as the semi-private, wholly-owned subsidiary propaganda arms of the Corporate State) at the behest of the "Boys" (you know, a little "Sleepin' W/The Enemy")and is rewarded with DoD largesses for his favorite firm or charity?
"Gen. Scales appeared in NPR reports, by your own accounting, some 100 times, and nobody, apparently, could EVER have anticipated he'd have an agenda? Nobody looked at who ELSE he was working for?
"Now, he says, he complained about the conduct of the operations. Okay. Very courageous, I guess. But that's what I call a 'technical' complaint. He was critical of tactics, and perhaps there were others, too; but I cannot recall ever hearing anyone above the rank of sergeant quoted on NPR with anything critical to say about the invasion, conquest, subsequent occupation--to say nothing of the rape and pillage--of Iraq. And probably no more than one or two of them, at that, and I think they're dead.
"The whole episode, including NPR's response, illustrates my long-held contention that in the corporate state, corporate media are STATE Media, and any and all reporting or 'news' or similar species of information exuding therefrom must be regarded, de facto, as State propaganda.
"This was how the Russians survived Communism. We have come to an entirely predictable, but still terribly sad place, if the People of the USofA have to take lessons from the People of the old USSR in the art of discerning what was really news in the steady diet of propaganda.
"I know that my criticisms, along with the several dozen more which I have read here (and with the substantial majority of which I totally concur) must be difficult for you to see and consider. Perhaps you are tempted to dismiss these criticisms as the rantings of fanatics and partisans. Perhaps you can taste the bile of denial behind your teeth. But often truth does indeed hurt. And that taste? Might it be self-revulsion for playing such a willing part in such shameful events, and even now trying to rationalize, excuse or justify them?