Question Everything
Why so skeptical?
I hear that question way too often. The short answer is that after a few decades on Wall Street, you learn that when a lot of any money is at stake, people quite easily become completely and totally full of bullshit.
This is why I (to quote someone else) "consistently doubt everything, especially government and mainstream media, and asks questions that have readers asking their own questions."
The most egregious example in recent memory landed on the front page of the Sunday NYT:
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration’s war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.
Go read the full article -- but not on a full stomach . . .
>
Source:
Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand
DAVID BARSTOW
NYT, April 20, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html
Sunday, April 20, 2008 | 07:30 PM | Permalink
| Comments (52)
| TrackBack (0)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00e551ee826b8833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Question Everything:
Comments
Maybe I'm simply cyncical, but having lived with the Vietnam War daily "body counts", (how could we kill off enough North Vietnamese to depopulate that entire country and still lose the war?) I haven't believed anything that has come from the Pentagon since 1964.
Posted by: Winston Munn | Apr 20, 2008 7:59:57 PM
In the past, I would sometimes have wacky dreams and then be thankful when I woke up. Now it’s the other way around. Reality has turned wacky and the dreams are a peaceful oasis.
Posted by: touche | Apr 20, 2008 8:01:32 PM
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
President Eisenhower, Farewell address, 1961
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Eisenhower%27s_farewell_address
Posted by: pmorrisonfl | Apr 20, 2008 8:09:37 PM
I'd say the Pentagon and the New York Times are about equally deserving of our skepticism.
Posted by: John F. | Apr 20, 2008 8:12:58 PM
Senator Kennedy was once asked by Terri Gross (Fresh Air on NPR:
"What is the thing that has changed the most since you started in Congress 45 years ago?"
Answer? "The influence of money."
Rep ipsa loquitur.
Posted by: Francois | Apr 20, 2008 8:13:10 PM
Barry, great blog,
It is right to be skeptical about what you read in the, The New York Times or hear from our new young coming president candidates.
"Thus has he—and many more of the same bevy that I know the drossy 180 age dotes on—only got the tune of the time and outward habit of encounter, a kind of yeasty collection, which carries them through and through the most fond and winnowed opinions; and do but blow them to their trial, the bubbles are out." Hamlet- William Shakespeare
Translation- They/He's like so many successful people in these trashy times—he's patched together enough fancy phrases and trendy opinions to carry him along. But blow a little on this bubbly talk, and it'll burst. There's no substance here.
Posted by: David | Apr 20, 2008 8:45:03 PM
...and nothing will happen. Not with the network and cable news or with the Pentagon sunshine pumpers. No wonder 90% think we're on the wrong track...after this story, the remaining 10% may change their minds.
Is this any different than the snow job from the BLS when they report the CPI, employment, GDP, etc.? Perhaps they've also hired 'analysts' to flood the financial news channels to manipulate, distort, and shape the economic news.
Posted by: Billy Shears | Apr 20, 2008 8:52:09 PM
Mother's milk to the Cheneys of this world. Lyme tick disease for the rest of us.
Unlike a regular business, these people are lethal. The military is a totalitarian society which cannot be reasoned with. It's not just about profit; it's about power. We are sheep to be sheared and sacrificed if need be. We pay for the wars and provide cannon fodder. Their part is to be trouble makers. They make trouble for anyone who gets in their way. In a Senate Hearing recently a fellow named Nuzzle from the adminstration was asking for a mere 108 billion for the war. One Senator wanted answers about waste and fraud. The Senator said that a week previous a person had sat in the same chair as Nuzzle telling the Senate about Halliberton funneling money through the Virgin Islands to avoid Government oversite. Since then that person had THREE attempts on their life. Nuzzle didn't know anything about that.
It's going to be an interesting year.
Posted by: AGG | Apr 20, 2008 9:07:43 PM
Skepticism should be extended to all American media (4 corporations,each with their own agenda and it's not in the interest of the American people).
Go abroad.
Posted by: judyo | Apr 20, 2008 9:09:07 PM
If you were discussing something with an associate over lunch, drinks, etc. -- wouldn't you mention your affiliation with some org if it was within the context of the talk?
OTOH, if you're trying to close some business deal, you play 'close to the vest', and you don't say anything more than you need to; being careful to not reveal anything that isn't directly related ... nor anything that ~IS~ directly related, if it may jeopardize the deal.
How true, about when any money is involved -- think about selling a car; or worse, a used car salesman(!)
These guys are pretty much in the tank for the Administration -- not to be trusted.
A corollary to the title of the post, "question everything" ... "Trust No One".
(can't take credit for that ...)
Posted by: Ken M. | Apr 20, 2008 9:16:10 PM
"Since many people believe that some princes are reputed wise, thanks rather to their wise counselors than to their own natural gifts, they ought to be told that they deceive themselves. For this is a general rule that never fails: a prince who is not wise himself cannot be wisely counseled... An unsise prince, having to consider the advice of several counselors, would never receive concordant opinions, and he would not be able to reconcile them on his own. His counselors would pursue thier own interests and he would know neither how to rule them nor how to understand them. They could not do otherwise, for men will always prove bad unless necessity compels them to be good. Therefore I conclude that good advice, no matter where it comes from, ultimately derives from the prudence of the pricnce, and the prudence of the prince does not derive from good advice."
Niccolo Machiavelli, "The Prince"
Posted by: DownSouth | Apr 20, 2008 9:18:00 PM
☺☺☺"The military is a totalitarian society which cannot be reasoned with. It's not just about profit; it's about power. We are sheep to be sheared and sacrificed if need be. We pay for the wars and provide cannon fodder. Their part is to be trouble makers. They make trouble for anyone who gets in their way."--Posted by: AGG | Apr 20, 2008 9:07:43 PM
"The people loved peace peace and therefore loved moderate rulers: the soldiers loved rulers endowed with military spirit--insolent, cruel, and rapacious--who would employ these quantities against the people to gain them double wages and otherwise give vent to their own avarice and ferocity."--Niccolo Machiavelli, "The Prince"
"Five great enemies to peace inhabit with us--avarice, ambition, envy, anger and pride. If those enemies were to be banished, we should infallibly enjoy perpetual peace."--Petrarch
"It is very easy to fool the people at the start of a war and run it on a confidential basis. But later the wounded start coming back and the actual news spreads. Then, finally, when we have won, the men who fought the war come home. A government which wants to keep the confidence of its people after the war, or during the last stages of it, should take the people into its confidence and tell them everything that they can know, bad as well as good, so long as their knowing of it does not help the enemy. Covering up the errors to save the men who make them can only lead to a lack of confidence which can be one of the greatest dangers a nation can face."--Ernest Hemingway
"There is no instance of a country having benefitted from prolonged warfare."--Sun Tzu
Posted by: DownSouth | Apr 20, 2008 9:42:03 PM
It's a funny country we live in. Each July 4th we celebrate men who put their lives on the line to establish a republic based in large measure on the philosophy that an unchecked government is a despotic government; implicit in this was a healthy skepticism towards those in power gained through the real experience of dealing with the British monarchy.
Ever since then, the national self-image that most Americans have is that we're a country of individuals deeply skeptical of authority, charmingly rebellious by nature, and quick to pick a fight with anyone seeking to impose their will on us.
The reality today is that a large percentage of Americans have attitudes toward government and authority that King George III would have found congenial. We have a President who has in his "signing statements" repeatedly stated his intention to disregard laws duly passed by Congress because he himself says he doesn't agree with them, and by and large Americans who have trouble with this are dismissed by the current administration, private citizens, and major media commentators as unpatriotic freaks, troublemakers, and criminals, if not outright supporters of terrorism.
Just a couple of days ago that famous patriot and military hero Newt Gingrich said "If there’s a threat, you have a right to defend society,” ... people will give up all their liberties to avoid that level of threat.“
I don't think you need any more evidence of how extensively the dry rot of authoritarianism has permeated the Republican Party in particular, and our culture in general.
Posted by: bluestatedon | Apr 20, 2008 9:49:30 PM
Really, is anyone _at all_ surprised by this ?
Even the teensiest tiniest bit ? Guys like Chomsky, Herman, and others have been meticulously documenting this for DECADES.
It is only when things start to hit the mainstream fan do people finally wake up and realize that there is loads of BS flying at them. Well here's a news flash - when things were supposedly "good", the BS was flying at even harder, but nobody seemed to care ...
Posted by: marcello | Apr 20, 2008 9:53:05 PM
I was going to post this earlier, but it made my head hurt, so I stopped. I have to now.
Over the past couple of weeks, I've heard at least 5 people (men and women), in normal social conversation, question why people haven't taken to the streets against our government.
Generally speaking, I believe that the middle class is well aware of its current precarious economic situation. They are also acutely aware of the breakdown of of our political system (for lack of a better generalization regarding the governing abuses of the current administration), and of the capitulation of the media to their corporate/governmental masters. In spite of this knowledge, they steadfastly refuse to confront their government on behalf of their own interests and/or the interests of those similarly situated. Civil demonstration - not to mention civil disobedience - has become declasse for the middle and lower classes. It's beneath them. (maybe they'll hire illegal immigrants as stand-ins).
I think the logic goes like this: "If I go and protest, my neighbors and coworkers will think I'm a liberal kook." Or, "maybe the government is watching the demonstrators - wouldn't want any trouble." Or, "Ooh! There's a Three Stooges marathon on Comedy Central!" (there's your free circus for you fans of Roman history). Then there are those who, like me, spend their time responding to blogs instead of confronting misplaced and misused power (in my own defense, I did go to an anti-war march in DC about a year ago).
The "me" generation is fixin' to learn the hard way why collective action is preferable to being a pretender to wealth, status, and neo-gentrification.
That'll pretension will disappear as soon as the Beemers start gettin' towed away (dead soldiers and civilians in Iraq don't rate).
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius | Apr 20, 2008 10:00:38 PM
Is this a true telling of a fraud bailout or a fake story of a true bailout?
Bear Stearns Buy-Out... 100% Fraud
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php?p=33768#post33768
Posted by: Wayne | Apr 20, 2008 10:11:34 PM
Is this the X-Files or Big Picture?
And we wonder why Meredith Whitney got death threats?
Posted by: 12th Percentile | Apr 20, 2008 10:14:44 PM
Barry - while we are on the subject. You should add "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" to your book list.
Posted by: 12th Percentile | Apr 20, 2008 10:18:16 PM
If you haven't seen them, these are two PBS specials along the same vein as the NYT's story:
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/blog/2007/04/preview_buying_the_war.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/
Needless to say, neither one is very kind to the New York Times, which played a key role in selling the war to the American people.
One thing stands out in my mind. It wasn't the Fox Newses of the world that sold out the American people. They lack credibility with a large swath of the American public and therefore have limited influence. It was New York Times, withits moderate and liberal audience and tremendous prestige, that was able to turn the tide in favor of the administration.
In this NY Times story the author speaks of Trojan Horses. But the real Trojan Horse was the New York Times.
Posted by: DownSouth | Apr 20, 2008 10:22:31 PM
Here's a better link to a streaming video of the PBS Bill Moyer special "Buying the War"
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html
Posted by: DownSouth | Apr 20, 2008 10:31:07 PM
This is a little disingenuous, and quite a bit late. Aren't these the same folks who sold copy from the weekly fearmongering of Judith Miller between 9/11 and the start of the Iraq war?
In retrospect, no, even at the time, Judy's stories were a bit too fantastic...it hearkens back to babies being thrown out of their incubators and onto the floor. Same country, same motive, same family, different time.
Posted by: Rich_Lather | Apr 20, 2008 10:34:35 PM
CNBC derives a significant portion of its revenues from advertising, those very same advertisers that prosper during bullish markets and positive market psychology, hence all the spin. Awful is just bad, bad is neutral, neutral is good, good is stellar. CNBC is a podium for money with an agenda, lure the sheep to the sheers... and make sure they don't leave. Hammer and Sickle, absolutely.
Posted by: stuart | Apr 20, 2008 10:35:37 PM
One must chum the water in order to lure the fish. Don't fret, I'm afraid that there is an ample supply of rotten fish heads yet to be tossed....and it isn't going to smell any better come summer.
Posted by: sixthskinjob | Apr 20, 2008 10:36:31 PM
Even Obama was pro war when it comes to the Civil War and WWII. So it is safe to say that there are good wars. And actually, any war you win is a good war and any war you lose is a bad war :)
America stopped North Korea from taking over the South. Anybody want to live in a Korea under Kim's rule?
Iraq and Vietnam are the wars that didn't go as expected. America has troops in South Korea, Germany, and Japan. And there is peace and we don't tell the countries what to do as if we were conquerors. And interestingly enough, those three countries mentioned are economic powerhouses for their people.
I agree 100% you have to question everything. Whether it be Left or Right bias.
Posted by: Rock | Apr 20, 2008 10:56:11 PM
Another excellent MIT-sponsored lecture on media coverage of the war can also be found here...
http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/forums/covering_iraq.html
Posted by: DownSouth | Apr 20, 2008 11:26:36 PM
