Posted on 06/11/2008 9:54:40 AM PDT by Mobile Vulgus
-By Warner Todd Huston
Congressional Democrats announced early in May that they wanted to make "military propaganda" illegal. To achieve this goal they passed new legislation that strengthened previous legislation that is supposed to ban the Pentagon from indulging in "propaganda" for the military.
This bill is supposed to stop the military from sending "any form of communication in support of national objectives designed to influence the opinions, emotions, attitudes or behavior of the people of the United States in order to benefit the sponsor, either directly or indirectly."
In other words, the military is not allowed to talk to the American people or Congress for fear of disseminating "propaganda."
The only way to fulfill this idiotic policy is to stop anyone in the military from ever speaking in public because, when you get right down to it, nearly any communication from the Pentagon, or any command staff in theater, will have the effect of "influencing" those who hear it. That is the nature of human communication, after all.
Of course this is a silly concept that the Democrat Party has come up with. Every single thing that man conceives of must be "sold" to everyone else to get implemented. The idea is born in the minds of one or a few and then those disciples of the idea go forth and begin a campaign to convince those who can put that idea into place that the idea is worthy of support. In essence, that is propaganda in its simplest form. The happy face is put on, the hands are shaken, and the plan is laid out for discussion. This is called being human! It's how we all get things done.
Besides, what level of information becomes propaganda and what just "information"? To a rabid, anti-military nut any words from the Pentagon is "propaganda." To the highest booster, none are. Who is to determine when what is being said becomes "propaganda"?
My guess is no one in the Democrat caucus is smart enough to know.
But, let's look at the real reason this simple-minded policy was created. The real reason the Democrats want such a policy in place is to silence the military entirely. Democrats aren't interested in keeping the tender ears of the people from being assaulted with "propaganda." No, they want to be able to shut the military off from being able to appear before the American people to defend themselves against Democrat attacks. THAT is the true goal.
If the Democrat Party can keep the Pentagon in the can, then Congress and the Democrat Party will be the conduit of information between the military and the people. And the Democrat Party finds an enemy in the American military. So, what better way to further their own propaganda then by making sure the enemy's will never be heard.
Stalin would be proud of Congressional democrats.
They know they can’t spit on them in this war because, unlike vietnam, we have internet, blogs, and talk radio to get the truth out. So they think they can muzzle the military and, by shutting them up, they can demonize them so bad the American people will think every soldier coming back from Iraq is worse than some SS Camp Guard.
Traitorous Scumbags.
I want any, and I mean ANY, liberal that stumbles across this thread to explain to me how, in light of this piece, if true, anyone can say that the Dems, or at least a large block of them, are not anti Military, and are not putting party interests above the best interests of the country.
More important, stop any good news on operations coming out of Iraq.
Can’t have that. It’s death announcements or radio silence.
I think that I am going to vomit.
-PJ
Oh, I don’t know. I think this might be a great idea for the military. This law would be a handy excuse for the military to keep reporters out of operational theatres lest the reporters accidentally obtain an opinion from a member of the military.
Never mind the fact that this is yet another removal of 1st amendment rights...... Maybe we ought to outlaw the Democrats. I liked them better back in the days of Hubert Humphrey - heck, I even like Sam Nunn (but I bet if he hasn’t switched party affiliation he’s certainly cringing over this wherever he is.....)
Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but, isn’t this censorship? I seem to remember something in our Constitution about freedom of speech. Or, does that only apply to some animals (the ones who are more equal than others)?
Blog on!!!
If you don't get it yet, the Democrat party is hell bent on converting the US to a Marxist country.
this happened in America?
...you sure this story isn’t out of NK?
His election as president would be the greatest coup any enemy has ever scored against this country and could easily lead to the worst, horrific disaster in our nation's history.
THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
VOTE NOBAMANATION 2008
That's the MSM's job. For the Democrats, "news" = Democrat talking points.
This proposed legislation is also wildly unconstitutional, so even if it passes we can hope that the Supreme Court will toss it out.
Our military, and both governments had pressers everyday, with reporters from all over the globe, asking very tough questions.
The military addressed our wins and loses, mistakes and successes, plans and strategies, as did the governments in both war theaters.
And we got nothing, ZERO, ZILCH NADA!
This was deliberate on the part of the networks and their DNC masters.
Well stated.
Expect nothing less from anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-life Democrat Crime Syndicate and their enablers/co-conspirator TRAITOROUS, SCUMBAGS.
When we said “free speech” we didn’t mean for you. :D
Meanwhile Democrat/left wing propaganda being pumped out of our Colleges and Universities is A okay. :D
Oh my GOD! It’s happening...
Who is backing this bill, I want names, I want phones and addresses! This cannot stand! We cannot just sit infront of our computers posting comments we need to let the entire US know!
Wait! Weren’t these the same baboons that were stomping around complaining that they weren’t being “kept in the loop”?!
The dhimmy/liberal traitors want to make everything illegal except illegals.
Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., who co-sponsored the House bill with Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, said the recent House legislation should not affect the Pentagon’s day-to-day operations, including factual updates on the war given to the media. Rather, the legislation makes clear that Congress will not tolerate behind-the-scenes efforts by the Bush administration to manipulate public opinion, he said.
“Rep. Paul Hodes, D-N.H., who co-sponsored the House bill with Reps. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn., and Peter DeFazio, D-Oregon, said the recent House legislation should not affect the Pentagon’s day-to-day operations, including factual updates on the war given to the media.
Rather, the legislation makes clear that Congress will not tolerate behind-the-scenes efforts by the Bush administration to manipulate public opinion, he said.
“I hope it inspires the Pentagon to tell the truth,” Hodes said.
Not everyone on Capitol Hill agrees the military overstepped its bounds. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a tireless advocate of Bush’s policies in Iraq, says the military was fairly trying to promote what it saw as the facts on the ground.
“The idea that we call the people who disagree with us propagandists” and those who agree “great seers and statesmen and philosophers doesn’t make any sense,” said Hunter, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.
The House included the propaganda ban in its 2009 defense authorization bill. The Senate plans to debate its version of the defense bill this summer.”
The dems better get crackin’ and fast. The positive news coming out of Iraq is too vast and quick for them to undermine. They could loose this.
-PJ
To the Democrats, the military and its personnel are just tools for implementing policy. They are just robots that cannot have an opinion. Do you ask your vacuum cleaner if it likes sucking up dirt all day???
I fear the ‘enemy within’ more than any foreign aggressor.
The Democrats are desperate to silence dissent. The more power they accrue, the more draconian the censorship will become until they’re throwing people in jail for disagreeing with them. Don’t forget the serious suggestion that criticizing man caused global warming be criminalized.
Only phony soldiers allowed to speak on behalf of military strategy and objectives.
Quit questioning their patriotism.
I guess that would keep them from having “Congressional hearings” during which they insult the top generals (Petraeus et al).....
Is there a list of congress critters who voted for this?
I was unable to find a House bill about this. It's irritating when someone publishes an article about a bill and they somehow neglect to give an accurate title or bill number- the author forces us to either accept his analysis, or spend time looking for the exact bill they are talking about.
If anyone can find the House bill please post (I already did a search by House sponsor, Hodes, Delauro, DeFazio).
DBM traitor ping.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:h5658eh.txt.pdf
Here it is, section 1075, page 559, of the “Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2009 (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)”.
The Senate bill seems to be a backup in case someone reads the 888 page appropriations bill and attempts to take out Sect 1075.
Beat me to it. Absolutely.
Next they’re going to complain because they can’t get anyone in the military to answer questions, and they’ll blame it on some imaginary gag order.
Odd, innit, the relationship between certain public books and Congressional actions? McClellan’s book, Wilson’s book, some of the 911 books, Clark’s book and subsequent TV special, Earth in the Balance, Silent Spring, and for all we know The Fog. Almost as though the book is used as propaganda to justify Congressional action.
9 SEC. 1075. PROHIBITIONS RELATING TO PROPAGANDA.
10 (a) PROHIBITION.—No part of any funds authorized
11 to be appropriated in this or any other Act shall be used
12 by the Department of Defense for propaganda purposes
13 within the United States not otherwise specifically author
14 ized by law.
15 (b) REPORTS.—Not later than 90 days after the date
16 of the enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the
17 Department of Defense and the Comptroller General of
18 the United States shall each conduct a study of, and sub
19 mit to the Congress a report on, the extent to which the
20 Department of Defense has violated the prohibition on
21 propaganda established in section 8001 of Public Laws
22 107–117, 107–248, 108–87, 108–287, 109–148, 109–
23 289, and 110–116, the Department of Defense Appropria24
tions Acts for fiscal years 2002 through 2008.
1 (c) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the
2 term ‘‘propaganda’’ means any form of communication in
3 support of national objectives designed to influence the
4 opinions, emotions, attitudes, or behavior of the people of
5 the United States in order to benefit the sponsor, either
6 directly or indirectly.
It was the defense appropriations bill, see above.
The Democrats hate our military. They just won’t say it out loud, so they try these little end-runs instead.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
law enforcement activity associated with counter-drug, counter-terrorism,
and national security investigations and operations.
TITLE VIII
GENERAL PROVISIONS
SEC. 8001. No part of any appropriation contained in this Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes not authorized by the Congress.
This section, 8001, is in every military appropriations bill as far back as I can see- it's always been illegal to emit "propaganda" without congressional approval.
“Democrats Try to Make Military Press Conferences Illegal”
I’m no fan of the Dems, but you are wrong on this headline. More importantly, your incauracy and total misuderstanding of DoD’s principles of information foment the nut-root right and the Larouche-... well, whichever side they’re on.
First off, it is illegal for military personnel to target propaganda at the America people (”No part of any appropriation contained in this or any other Act shall be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States not heretofore authorized by the Congress.”)
PSYOPs are different. The purpose of PSYOP is to induce or reinforce foreign attitudes and behavior favorable to the unit’s objectives.
See the difference? “within the United States” and “Foreign.”
Once more: “within the United States” and “Foreign.”
DoD in interacting with the press has the policy to “ available timely and accurate information so that the public, the Congress, and the news media may assess and understand the facts about national security and defense strategy.”
Additionally, “A free flow of general and military information shall be made available, without censorship or propaganda, to the men and women of the Armed Forces and their dependents.
and
“Information will not be classified or otherwise withheld to protect the Government from criticism or embarrassment.”
Do yourself a favor and read the DoD Directive here: http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/512205p.pdf
...you sure this story isn’t out of NK?
Nope...this is out of the same country that has nominated the Marxist Barack Hussein Obama for president.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.