General Sanchez Rips The Media

If ever there was a clearer example of selective reporting and bias by the media, here is the best example to date.

The left is translating and selectively quoting LTG (Ret) Ricardo Sanchez' comments during the October 12 Military Reporters and Editors Luncheon in Washington D.C. "Former top general rips Bush’s Iraq policy" is not exactly what happened here, yet if you were to accept their editorializing, that's what many are going to come away with.

So what did General Sanchez say, and what did he mean by it? Let me take a stab at it....

so I light up the Stare & Stripes.

there's the response - weasle

"Mr. XXXX

Thanks for your e-mail!

After his speech, retired Lt. Gen. Sanchez spoke at length about his criticisms of how the Iraq war has been handled, which is why we gave his Iraq comments the most weight in the story.

We felt it was important to touch on his critcisms of the media, including Stars and Stripes, which is why we included the two paragraphs that you mentioned.

But if you feel the story was unfair or missed a major point, would you like to write us a letter to the editor?

If so, feel free to send an e-mail to:
letters@mail.estripes.osd.mil

Thank you again for taking the time to write me, and let me know if I can be of any help in the future!

Jeff Schogol

For all you pinhead Sanchez haters who don’t know what you are blathering about other than hate, it always seems to be the same theme with you folks. Why are you so hateful? Are you jealous? Of course. The answer is “yes.” I posted this before, but your hatefulness probably did not allow you to read this:

“I didn’t want to say this earlier because of all the negative comments hurled General Sanchez’s way, and it would have been lost among all the negative comments.

“I worked with then “Major” Sanchez in the same office (DCSIM) here in Panama. I never met a more kinder, intelligent, and finer gentleman than this man. He never once embarrassed his soldiers by scolding them in front of anybody. (If he did scold someone...I’ll never know.) He treated everybody, from the lowest to the highest, with great respect. He was always in a positive mood and had a wonderful sense of humor. He made everyone around him feel good.

At that time, he was thinking about maybe leaving the army and going back to Texas and do something else. He didn’t have his sights on becoming general. He wasn’t power hunger.

“I don’t know what happened after that. He must have met up with a mentor who convinced him to stay on, and that was it. I think I know who his mentor was; but since I’m not sure, I won’t speculate. The next thing I knew, he was a general in Iraq.

“Anyway, I feel very lucky to have worked with him.

“He also had a lovely wife, and his beautiful 2-year old little girl could already read. Talk about smarts.”

I listened to CNN cover LTG Sanchez's speech, critical of the war. Then I went to FreeRepublic and copied the speech. I pasted the text of LTG Sanchez’s speech into my word processor. It was 13 pages long. He criticized the press for 5 pages, concluding on the top of page six that the press should be more ethical and reform itself:

FINALLY, I WILL LEAVE THIS SUBJECT WITH A QUESTION THAT WE MUST ASK OURSELVES--WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE ETHICAL STANDARDS OF THE PROFESSION IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT OUR DEMOCRACY DOES NOT CONTINUE TO BE THREATENED BY THIS DANGEROUS SHIFT AWAY FROM YOUR SACRED DUTY OF PUBLIC ENLIGHTENMENT?
...
I also noted:

THE THREAT OF EXTREMISM IS REAL AND DEMANDS UNIFIED ACTION AT THE SAME LEVELS DEMONSTRATED BY OUR FOREFATHERS DURING WORLD WAR I AND WORLD WAR II. AMERICA HAS FAILED TO DATE.

In World Wars I and II, the Republican party supported a President from the opposing party for the good of the country. The War on Terror, like much of the cold war, requires that the Democratic party support a President from the opposing party for the good of the country.

Is there a real threat?

AS A NATION WE MUST RECOGNIZE THAT THE ENEMY WE FACE IS COMMITTED TO DESTROYING OUR WAY OF LIFE. THIS ENEMY IS ARGUABLY MORE DANGEROUS THAN ANY THREAT WE FACED IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY.
...
AMERICA HAS SENT OUR SOLDIERS OFF TO WAR AND THEY MUST BE SUPPORTED AT ALL COSTS UNTIL WE ACHIEVE VICTORY OR UNTIL OUR POLITICAL LEADERS DECIDE TO BRING THEM HOME. OUR POLITICAL AND MILITARY LEADERS OWE THE SOLDIER ON THE BATTLEFIELD THE STRATEGY, THE POLICIES AND THE RESOURCES TO WIN ONCE COMMITTED TO WAR. AMERICA HAS NOT BEEN FULLY COMMITTED TO WIN THIS WAR. AS THE MILITARY COMMANDERS ON THE GROUND HAVE STATED SINCE THE SUMMER OF 2003, THE U.S. MILITARY ALONE CANNOT WIN THIS WAR. AMERICA MUST MOBILIZE THE INTERAGENCY AND THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ELEMENTS OF POWER, WHICH HAVE BEEN ABJECT FAILURES TO DATE, IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE VICTORY. OUR NATION HAS NOT FOCUSED ON THE GREATEST CHALLENGE OF OUR LIFETIME. THE POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC ELEMENTS OF POWER MUST GET BEYOND THE POLITICS TO ENSURE THE SURVIVAL OF AMERICA. PARTISAN POLITICS HAVE HINDERED THIS WAR EFFORT AND AMERICA SHOULD NOT ACCEPT THIS. AMERICA MUST DEMAND A UNIFIED NATIONAL STRATEGY THAT GOES WELL BEYOND PARTISAN POLITICS AND PLACES THE COMMON GOOD ABOVE ALL ELSE. TOO OFTEN OUR POLITICIANS HAVE CHOSEN LOYALTY TO THEIR POLITICAL PARTY ABOVE LOYALTY TO THE CONSTITUTION BECAUSE OF THEIR LUST FOR POWER. OUR POLITICIANS MUST REMEMBER THEIR OATH OF OFFICE AND RECOMMIT THEMSELVES TO SERVING OUR NATION AND NOT THEIR OWN SELF-INTERESTS OR POLITICAL PARTY. THE SECURITY OF AMERICA IS AT STAKE AND WE CAN ACCEPT NOTHING LESS. ANYTHING SHORT OF THIS IS UNQUESTIONABLY DERELICTION OF DUTY.

THESE ARE FAIRLY HARSH ASSESSMENTS OF THE MILITARY AND PRESS RELATIONSHIP AND THE STATUS OF OUR WAR EFFORT. I REMAIN OPTIMISTIC AND COMMITTED TO THE ENABLING OF MEDIA OPERATIONS UNDER THE TOUGHEST OF CONDITIONS IN ORDER TO KEEP THE WORLD AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INFORMED. OUR MILITARY MUST EMBRACE YOU FOR THE SAKE OUR DEMOCRACY BUT YOU OWE THEM ETHICAL JOURNALISM.

THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY

MAY GOD BLESS YOU AND MAY GOD BLESS AMERICA.

PRAISE BE TO THE LORD MY ROCK WHO TRAINS MY FINGERS FOR BATTLE AND MY HANDS FOR WAR.

THANK YOU.

/(Ernest-a-t-B)I just saw a video of this speech, CSPAN ....he was taking shots at the T(O)UTAL leadership of this country....Democrats and Republicans....and the Media....and those using the conflict in advancing their thirst for power in Washington..../

Yes, there is criticism/disagreement of Military tactics et al; but there is a larger focus here and Sanchez's aim is steady and his messge and target clear:

(Sanchez)In World Wars I and II, the Republican party supported a President from the opposing party for the good of the country. The War on Terror, like much of the cold war, requires that the Democratic party support a President from the opposing party for the good of the country.

(As for his 'Stars and Stripes' ban. . .Sanchez is referencing only the 'European Stars and Stripes' and for their doing precisely what our 'Leftist MSM' did here and around the world as the media became it's own message as they leveled their own assault against our Military; by which our enemies were served - and our own 'served up'; gratuitously as any Treason.)

Who knows; perhaps some judgments here might be made more clearly or easily. . .if 'our' Administration was not fighting an enemy abroad. . .as well as here at home. Sanchez certainly offers that the 'second front' here at home against our enemy; and against the 'truth' is costing us dearly.

(Sanchez): ALL OF THESE CHALLENGES COMBINED CREATE A MEDIA ENVIRONMENT THAT DOES A TREMENDOUS DISSERVICE TO AMERICA. OVER THE COURSE OF THIS WAR TACTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT EVENTS HAVE BECOME STRATEGIC DEFEATS FOR AMERICA BECAUSE OF THE TREMENDOUS POWER AND IMPACT OF THE MEDIA AND BY EXTENSION YOU THE JOURNALIST.

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.