Refusing to allow Americans to travel overseas and badmouth the US government is yet another good reason to move overseas - our government is too oppressive.

From the linked story:

"I was told by a senior U.S. official that the State Department was conducting a screening process on intellectuals..."

So I wrote a poem:

The thought police are here
And now I leave in fear!
Of a midnight knock upon my door..
IHATEBUSHHATEHIM HATESIES HIM!!!!

HATE! HATE! HATE!

And this is even worse:

In another instance of apparent politicization, a request by the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, Indonesia, to arrange a visit by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., who lived in Indonesia when he was young, was delayed for seven months. The visit never occurred.

By the way, I mis-sppelled "intellectual" in my first comment, a sign of my anger.

I say we should mind very much.

The LA Times admitted, "...the articles are basically factual..." and then whined, "they present only one side of events and omit information that might reflect poorly on the U.S. or Iraqi governments." Later they "reported", "The military's information operations campaign has sparked a backlash among some senior military officers in Iraq and at the Pentagon who argue that attempts to subvert the news media could destroy the U.S. military's credibility in other nations and with the American public." It sounds to me that "some military officers" are ignorant of the fact our military's policy is for psychological operations campaigns to be truthful so as to ensure we maintain our credibility in order to counter the enemies lies. If in fact "some" of our "military officers in Iraq" are against countering the enemies efforts there, the problem rest with those officers.

The Philadelphia Inquirer said, "Eight current and former military, defense and other U.S. officials in Baghdad and Washington agreed to discuss the payments to Iraqi reporters and other American military information operations because they fear that the efforts are promoting practices that are unacceptable for a democracy. They requested anonymity to avoid retaliation." Setting aside that those eight could be just about anybody, total idiots, or very ignorant, the report claims, "the U.S. public is at risk of being influenced by the information operations because what is planted in the Iraqi media can be picked up by international news organizations and Internet bloggers." What they are really saying is if Internet bloggers tell the U.S. public the truth then the international news organizations that work so hard to keep it from them will lose credibility, lose readership, and might go out of business. OMG! If that happened, those eight officials wouldn't have a place to spread their disinformation.

Knight Rider's (via the Mercury Times) whines about our State Department not looking to hire people to go overseas and publicly disagree with U.S. foreign policy. While that sound like smart hiring practices to me, Knight Rider tries to stir up a controversy where none exists by citing Temple University professor Mahmoud Ayoub and U.S. Senator Barack Obama, D-Ill. Knight Rider claims Mahmoud Ayoub "was turned down without explanation last summer for a grant to teach a course in Indonesia," gives no indication they asked the State Department for an explanation, and admitted "Ayoub said he wasn't accusing the department of a political vendetta and that he still participated in a program to host international visitors in this country." Sen. Obama wasn't even aware there was a "controversy" until Knight Rider asked him about it. What is the "controversy?" Answer: "Message discipline." The State Department isn't a jobs program for dissenters; they are responsible for promoting the foreign policy of the United States. It is only logical they want to send overseas people to promote our foreign policy. Dissenters can pay there own way. If Knight Rider wants to send people overseas who disagree with our foreign policy, they can hire them to do so. It might be nice if they would stick to reporting the news instead or trying to make the news by stirring up a controversy.

Well, you know, they have to write SOMETHING and there just aren't enough dead people and explosions every day to cover the whole 30 minutes of "original" reporting.

If Knight Rider wants to send people overseas who disagree with our foreign policy, they can hire them to do so.

They do - they call them "reporters".

So much for the goal of advancing "freedom," including a "free and independent media." I guess the Liar in Chief was lying about that one, too. Not only did the U.S. military write propaganda, but they are bribing Iraqi "journalists," too.

There's a logic here. A Fake President has the military write Fake News so he can keep on faking it.

Incidentally, I don't think this was ever about influencing Iraqi opinion. It was the first step of a propaganda operation directed at the American public. The idea was to plant the propaganda in the Iraqi press, and then hector the U.S. media to follow up on the fake stories.

It all supports the latest wingnut slogan: Let's All Pretend It's O.K.

Oh, and the "Lincoln Group" that's distributing the propaganda? Run by, you guessed it, a Republican operative from Illinois, "the Land of Lincoln." The amount of the contract? A hundred million bucks. I wonder what else they've been buying.

You've got to love this:

http://w3t.org/?u=ehc

One storyboard written by U.S. troops titled "Children Murdered at the Hands of Terrorists" was recast by Lincoln Group as an opinion column written by an Iraqi. It was published in Baghdad's Al Sabaah newspaper on July 19, documents show.

"Have we all given up?" the op-ed reads. "What kind of man am I if I tolerate the massacre of our children? What kind of human am I if I condone the slaughter of innocents? What kind of Muslim am I if I stand in silence as immoral cowards kill our children in the name of God and the prophet Muhammad?"

Documents show that Al Sabaah was paid more than $1,500 to publish the piece.

Apparently there are so few Iraqis willing to say what the U.S. military wants them to say that the occupation force has to write the heartfelt sentiments of outrage themselves, stick a fake name on them, and bribe someone to print it.

Now is that pathetic, or what?

Tim Sumner reinforced my comments on the matter:

The money quote of the LA Times article for me was:

Though the articles are basically factual, they present only one side of events and omit information that might reflect poorly on the U.S. or Iraqi governments, officials said.

That made me laugh out loud. Here in the US, we get only one side of events and omit information that might reflect positively on the U.S, and very often, the facts are not correct, and the "factual" reporting is replete with adjectives slanting the story. Which would you rather have?

Now is that pathetic, or what?

No more pathetic than when legislators -- or commenters on milblogs -- fold/spindle/mutilate the truth into words like "quagmire" and "Bush Lied".

Be careful with those stones, Mr. Corning ...

How to translate from Wilson Kolb into English.

What he said: "Free and independent media"
What he meant: "Media free to independentely invent stories and fabricate articles with no accountability or morality whatsoever"

What he said: "The idea was to plant the propaganda in the Iraqi press, and then hector the U.S. media to follow up on the fake stories."
What he meant: "The only fake stories allowed in the US or Iraqi media are those which discredit Chimpy McHitler and his band of Republinazis"

But don't you understand? If we try to influence news reporting, then we're no better than Saddam! The terrorists have won!

Incidentally, how is Wilson posting from AshKKKroft's gulag? They don't have broadband in his cell, do they? Crap, we can't even stifle dissent in our political prisons.

Ummm...vetting overseas travelers eh? Wish they would start with Jimmy Carter and William Clinton, two who regularly speak dismissively about America and her leadership today.