Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

GoLeft TV

(3,910 posts)
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 03:04 PM Sep 2014

Papantonio: Who’s Funding the Pro War Pundits?

Cable news outlets are buzzing over a new conflict in the Middle East, but some of the biggest pro-war hawks might have a hidden agenda. New reports show that these pundits are being directly funded by the defense industry.

America's Lawyer Mike Papantonio discusses this story with attorney Howard Nations.

4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Papantonio: Who’s Funding the Pro War Pundits? (Original Post) GoLeft TV Sep 2014 OP
Here are the articles mentioned in this video mrdmk Sep 2014 #1
It's always whoever is making money off war. nt valerief Sep 2014 #2
+1 for exposure! This is sick, sick, sick! The fact that these Ken and Barbie's would interview Dustlawyer Sep 2014 #3
"We send our families to fight these wars" dotymed Sep 2014 #4

mrdmk

(2,943 posts)
1. Here are the articles mentioned in this video
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 04:55 PM
Sep 2014

Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

By DAVID BARSTOW
Published: April 20, 2008

link: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/20generals.html?pagewanted=all&module=Search&mabReward=relbias%3Ar%2C{%222%22%3A%22RI%3A17%22}&_r=0

In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded “the gulag of our times” by Amnesty International, there were new allegations of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for its closure.

The administration’s communications experts responded swiftly. Early one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.

To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as “military analysts” whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.

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.

<more at the link above>


Who’s Paying the Pro-War Pundits?

Lee Fang
September 16, 2014 (This article appeared in the October 6, 2014 edition of The Nation.)

link: http://www.thenation.com/article/181601/whos-paying-pro-war-pundits

If you read enough news and watch enough cable television about the threat of the Islamic State, the radical Sunni Muslim militia group better known simply as IS, you will inevitably encounter a parade of retired generals demanding an increased US military presence in the region. They will say that our government should deploy, as retired General Anthony Zinni demanded, up to 10,000 American boots on the ground to battle IS. Or as in retired General Jack Keane’s case, they will make more vague demands, such as for “offensive” air strikes and the deployment of more military advisers to the region.

But what you won’t learn from media coverage of IS is that many of these former Pentagon officials have skin in the game as paid directors and advisers to some of the largest military contractors in the world. Ramping up America’s military presence in Iraq and directly entering the war in Syria, along with greater military spending more broadly, is a debatable solution to a complex political and sectarian conflict. But those goals do unquestionably benefit one player in this saga: America’s defense industry.

Keane is a great example of this phenomenon. His think tank, the Institute for the Study of War (ISW), which he oversees along with neoconservative partisans Liz Cheney and William Kristol, has provided the data on IS used for multiple stories by The New York Times, the BBC and other leading outlets.

Keane has appeared on Fox News at least nine times over the last two months to promote the idea that the best way to stop IS is through military action—in particular, through air strikes deep into IS-held territory. In one of the only congressional hearings about IS over the summer, Keane was there to testify and call for more American military engagement. On Wednesday evening, Keane declared President Obama’s speech on defeating IS insufficient, arguing that a bolder strategy is necessary. “I truly believe we need to put special operation forces in there,” he told host Megyn Kelly.

Left unsaid during his media appearances (and left unmentioned on his congressional witness disclosure form) are Keane’s other gigs: as special adviser to Academi, the contractor formerly known as Blackwater; as a board member to tank and aircraft manufacturer General Dynamics; a “venture partner” to SCP Partners, an investment firm that partners with defense contractors, including XVionics, an “operations management decision support system” company used in Air Force drone training; and as president of his own consulting firm, GSI LLC.

<more at the link above>

These people were outed and they are on and in the media as creditable. Un-real...



Dustlawyer

(10,495 posts)
3. +1 for exposure! This is sick, sick, sick! The fact that these Ken and Barbie's would interview
Mon Sep 29, 2014, 07:32 PM
Sep 2014

these morally bankrupt bastards and be complicit in egging on and lying to Americans to draw us into another unnecessary war at the cost of countless lives, pain, misery, just so General Dynamics and General Electric (Funny how General is even in their names) could increase their already obscene profits even more. Americans are already experiencing deep cuts to social welfare over all of the "Deficit, deficit, deficit" talk of a year ago caused by the previous two wars, although you hear no mention of it now, nor how or who will be paying for all of this!

When will we wake up and say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! The whole world is going to hell in a hand basket due to the greed and corruption of people who already have more money than they could spend in 20 lifetimes!

The root cause of this problem is that these companies can buy politicians at a bargain rate! A couple of million to each one will net billions on top of billions in tax dollars to companies that don't even pay taxes! This is a fact and it is all legal! People wonder why politicians will not pass certain legislation that has the approval of 90% of Americans, what is so difficult to figure out?

dotymed

(5,610 posts)
4. "We send our families to fight these wars"
Tue Sep 30, 2014, 11:02 AM
Sep 2014

not out of misplaced patriotism, but out of economic necessity.
"They" have us where they want us.
FEUDALISM.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Video & Multimedia»Papantonio: Who’s Funding...