Quoth Pee Wee Herman.

The Department of Defense inspector general announced last Friday that it was undertaking a investigation of the program, and the Congress’ own General Accountability Office has “already begun looking into the program and would give a legal opinion on whether it violated longstanding prohibitions against spending government money to spread propaganda to audiences in the United States.”

Of course we have had quite a lot of enquiries that have gone nowhere, particularly with DoD.

Meanwhile, the TV networks have remained largely silent, as their credibility and transparency have been tarnished by the revelations about the program. As Media Matters has documented, the military analysts named in the Times piece appeared or were quoted more than 4,500 times on broadcast networks, cable news channels, and NPR. One minute they were giving ostensibly objective analysis, the next they were fawning over Rummy in private as “the leader.”

Meanwhile, in Canberra, the Libs are still busily pretending that the ABC has a leftwing bias… I guess if you believe the Murdoch media is telling it straight down the line, that’s how things might look.

Al-Hayat reports in Arabic that the Iranians hit back at US charges at the security meeting in Damascus, saying that the US and Iraq were not in a position to lecture others on terrorism as long as they gave refuge in Iraq to the Mojahedin-e Khalq Organization (MKO or MEK), which is responsible for numerous bombings and other terrorism in Iran. The US State Department acknowledges that the MEK is a terrorist organization, but the Pentagon is using it against Iran anyway.

A more detailed description of US abetting of the terrorist group is at
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/4/10/211056/036

Under international law, a country which abets terrorists is, well, “co-guilty.” In light of US support for the Nuremberg Trials, there should be a lot more hand-wringing about this issue in MSM.
—Aloha ~~~ Ozzie Maland ~~~ San Diego

Thanks, rb

I don’t want to take credit for being well informed…I’m fiddling around with a computer that can access Google. Perhaps functional is telegraphing comments to CT.

Thanks, rb

GAO: There Are No Federal Funds for Publicity and Propaganda

On 17 February 2005, the GAO issued a memorandum to the heads of all federal agencies advising that expenditure of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda purposes violates the ADA. (64) The objective of GAO’s memorandum was to emphasize the publicity and propaganda prohibition—especially with regard to prepackaged news stories. (65) The GAO stated that during the year preceding its memorandum, it found some federal agencies violated the publicity and propaganda prohibition and also the ADA by obligating appropriated funds to purchase prepackaged news stories. (66) Nevertheless, the GAO further advised that agencies could avoid violating the ADA if the news stories contained an appropriate disclaimer. (67)

Congress has prohibited the use of appropriated funds for publicity or propaganda in each of its annual appropriations acts since 1951. (68) Consequently, because there are no appropriated funds available for this purpose, any expenditure of appropriated funds—even one dollar—would necessarily violate the ADA’s prohibition against obligating funds in excess of the amount available in an appropriation. (69)

The Fox News is too pro-Republican, the CBS (or whatever) is too pro-Democratic, etc. The fact that these institutions channel, one way or another, views and messages of the major government cliques is natural, it’s expected; it doesn’t shock, doesn’t surprise.

It’s also seems natural (and has been proclaimed openly) that in the times of crises (and around these times) the the major media institutions must support the government. That is their duty. No Shock, no surprise there; everyone knows this is the way it is, this is the way it’s always been, it is what it is.

Not that different from Pravda, really. You read the propaganda, you guess what’s going on, you become good at it, then you start enjoying it sorta like the crossword puzzle, you enjoy being clever. So, you see, it’s all for the best. It can’t be different.

Q Why was the program kept secret?

MR. STANZEL: You can talk to the Defense Department. It was their program—which they’ve discontinued.

Q Who was in charge at the White House?

Someone forgot to insert

MR. STANZEL: …………

at this point in the transcript. Hahahah. :)

(Which, by the way, I’ve archived.)

 —bi, International Journal of Inactivism