Astroturfing the Military

The missing piece of the puzzle was actually available from the start:

Yesterday, a company that does public relations for the liberal activist political action committee MoveOn.org, Fenton Communications, organized a conference call for reporters and three active-duty soldiers to unveil the soldiers' anti-war group Appeal for Redress.
<...>
A staff member at Fenton Communications who requested anonymity said his company was approached last week by a longtime peace activist and former director of the anti-nuclear proliferation front known as SANE/Freeze, David Cortright, to publicize Appeal for Redress. Mr. Cortright is now president of an Indiana-based nonprofit group, the Fourth Freedom Forum, and his biography on the organization's Web site says he helped raise "more than $300,000 for the Win Without War coalition to avert a preemptive attack on Iraq in 2002–03."

That's from the October 26 New York Sun - kudos to the only reporters in the crowd who had the guts to tell the truth about this.

There's a full recap of this story so far here (including a definition of "astroturfing" for those who aren't familiar with the term).

More on "Sedition"

...specifically, that "grass roots" anti-war military effort here.

Unfortunately, the lie is halfway around the world (actually all the way - literally). Help spread the truth.

The Quasi-Annual

Our fundraiser continues. It my take me a while to write thank you notes this weekend, but it's time well spent.

Please make me work...

Thanks!

For the Record

Looks like the Pentagon is fighting back against misleading MSM reports.

The graphic above is from this story:

Newsweek Declines Pentagon Request to Examine Reporting

DOD asks magazine to reconsider refusal

Oct. 20, 2006 —In response to a Newsweek article on Afghanistan (“The Rise of Jihadistan,” October 2, 2006), the Department of Defense sent Newsweek a lengthy rebuttal of points of fact and opinion, as well as a request for an “opportunity to submit a stand-alone column that not only rebuts some of the more sensational charges, but offers your readers a clearer view of the very real challenges we face in Afghanistan—as well as the many achievements of the past five years.”

Newsweek dismissed the rebuttal as the “government position,” as well as the request for a stand-alone column. The Pentagon’s response to that letter read in part: “First, a ‘concise’ letter to the editor, of say, 200 words, cannot adequately address an [sic] 2200-word article containing a series of false assertions. Second, the issue is not Newsweek’s position versus the ‘government position.’ The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoods—which is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.”

Those hyperlinks are in the original, and full text of the letters exchanged, to include pdf scans of the original documents on letterhead, are also provided here.

Read all those, then bookmark the front page - it looks like it will be worth several return trips.

Good News/Bad News (Update 2)

Previous posts here and here.

The White House has responded to press accounts of the alleged dispute between Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki and U.S. Ambassador Khalilzad and General Casey. (Yes, I'm convinced they read Mudville in the White House.)

Of note is this quote - sourced to the BBC:

In Yesterday's Press Conference, Prime Minister Maliki Was Asked Whether The United States Had Set A "Timetable For The Withdrawal Of Foreign Forces From Iraq Within 18 Months."

As I suspected - a question phrased to mischaracterize the original statement from Khalilzad.

That also explains this quote from Maliki in yesterday's report:

The prime minister dismissed U.S. talk of timelines as driven by the coming midterm elections in the United States. "I am positive that this is not the official policy of the American government but rather a result of the ongoing election campaign. And that does not concern us much," he said.

Read that as his acknowledgement that the actual question was being phrased by a reporter, and not the U.S. government (i.e. Khalilzad) and it all fits together - Maliki knows it's the press statements that are driven by the elections, and which "does not concern us much". The actions of the U.S. government obviously concern him very deeply - no one could believe otherwise.

But enough of yesterday's news - on to Maliki's bombshell for today - in which he declares that he can get the job done sooner than the most optimistic U.S. timeline anyway:

Iraq's prime minister said on Thursday he could get violence under control in six months, half the time U.S. generals say they need, provided Washington gave him more weaponry and more say over his own forces.
<...>
"They think building Iraqi forces will need 12 to 18 months, for us to be in control of security," Maliki said, referring to remarks two days ago by U.S. commander General George Casey.

"We agree our forces need work but think that if, as we are asking, the rebuilding of our forces was in our own hands, then it would take not 12-18 months but six might be enough."
<...>
"I am now prime minister and overall commander of the armed forces yet I cannot move a single company without Coalition approval because of the U.N. mandate," Maliki said.

"I have to be careful fighting some militias and terrorists ... because they are better armed than the army and police," Maliki said. "The police are sharing rifles."
<...>
Asked what kind of Iraqi forces he wanted, Maliki said: "I'm not talking about modern tanks or modern warplanes and missiles ... I'm talking about having a well-trained army, swift and light on its feet and at the same time with medium weapons."

That kind of leadership is exactly what is needed in Iraq - I say we give him what he wants, get out of the way as much as possible, and see what happens in six months.

By the way, why wasn't this the biggest headline story of the day?

"Appeal for Redress"

For the record - I'm all for my fellow troops speaking their minds, but I'm not in favor of them being duped by Socialist organizations hiding behind false fronts.

And that's what's going on with a web site called "Appeal for Redress".

Good News/Bad News (Update 1)

Previous post here.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki corrects published comments regarding that Sadr City raid:

Maliki said the raid had his backing but argued that it was conducted in a heavy handed way that could wreck a political deal he had worked on with Moqtada al-Sadr, a radical anti-American cleric who controls the Mehdi Army Shi'ite militia. <...> Maliki had appeared to disavow the raid at a news conference on Wednesday, saying he had not been consulted, but he told Reuters his problem was with an operation in the same area which was part of the hunt for a kidnapped American soldier.

"We knew about the first part but they did not tell us about the second part," Maliki said.
<...>
Masked gunmen grabbed the American serviceman at the home of relatives he went to visit in Baghdad after leaving the fortified Green Zone, according to U.S. military officials who have identified him as a linguist of Iraqi descent.

Maliki said the man's brother was snatched with him but later let go. "The brother who was released said he been abducted by the Mehdi Army but we don't know what Mehdi Army means anymore," Maliki said.

"We asked the Sadr movement to look for him and they swear they know nothing about him," Maliki said. Sunni insurgents and loyalists of ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein sometimes also posed as Mehdi Army fighters in the same black garb, he said.

U.S. military spokesmen were not immediately available to comment on Maliki's remarks.

Bill Roggio has commentary here.

(And note this is titled Update 1...)