White House Selectively Edits ABC Iraq Report: Deletes Criticisms Before Sending To Reporters
White House Selectively Edits ABC Iraq Report: Deletes Criticisms Before Sending To Reporters
On ABC World News with Charles Gibson last night, ABC National Security Correspondent Jonathan Karl filed a report about the recent decline in American troop casualties in Iraq. In the report, Karl noted that “violence in Iraq is down,” but added that “there has been almost no political progress on the national level”:
In fact, there’s been almost no political progress on the national level, and U.S. officials know military gains won’t mean much if the Iraqi government doesn’t get its act together, which is one reason the Pentagon doesn’t even want to use the word “winning.”
Watch it:
After the report aired, the White House sent the piece out in an official White House publication called “White House Iraq Update.” But, as Karl writes today, the White House edited his report before sending it out, making it look “like an unqualified declaration of success in Iraq.”
In the version sent out by the White House, all references to a lack of political progress were removed. Here is full segment that the White House did not want reporters to see:
O’HANLON: … and it doesn’t answer the questions about political progress.
KARL: In fact, there’s been almost no political progress on the national level, and U.S. officials know military gains won’t mean much if the Iraqi government doesn’t get its act together, which is one reason the Pentagon doesn’t even want to use the word “winning.”
[To Defense Secretary] You’re not ready to say we’re winning, that the surge is working –
ROBERT GATES [Defense Secretary]: (From tape.) I think — I think that those end up being loaded words. I think we have been very successful. We need to continue being successful.
KARL: Today, Defense Secretary Gates said that the reduction in violence would not have been possible without the surge of 30,000 additional troops into Iraq, but, Charlie, those troops are going home in the coming months, raising the question of whether the violence will go up when they leave.
GIBSON: Jonathan Karl tonight reporting from the Pentagon, thanks.
Contacted by ABC, the White House admitted to editing the negative aspects of the report and acknowledged that it was “inappropriate.”
“The White House understands your concern,” White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe told ABC. “And the full text of your report will be released to the same distribution list so that recipients have a chance to see what the entire report was about.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
What was inappropriate–the fact that the report was edited? or the fact that someone said something counter to the President’s “take” on things?
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 pmNews reports have to be cleared by the White House ?
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:45 pmAnd the beat goes on….I guess if you cannot get actual progress in your ill-fated invasion, you might as well ‘manufacture’ it.
Do you think this might get the MSM upset? Is the MSM finally going to find some self-respect? If this episode doesn’y change the relationship of the MSM with the WH, the the republic certainly is kaput. How can we believe anything anymore?
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:46 pmThe ministry of truth is caught with their hands in the cookie jar again
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:46 pmWhen is the press going to start calling these bastards on the lies, distortions and misrepresentations made by this administration. We know the Bush and his minions are nothing more than vile, disgusting scum. Our press is no better. The MSM either has been co opted by evil corporate interests or are the usual pants-wetters that have inhabited the MSM.
It is time to take action against these enemies of the state.
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:48 pmOT – Sorry – But CNN is reporting that the AG nomination might still happen – “Two Democrats say they will vote for Bush’s attorney general pick, virtually ensuring the nomination will move to the full Senate.”
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:49 pmThis stems from the fact that the current batch of conservatives running the government do not understand what the purpose of journalism is. Because they have told all their lives that the media is liberally biased (untrue), they have come to believe that journalism should be used to advance propaganda and that it has been advancing the propaganda of the left for years. The reason they are qwrong is that they believe that both sides of a stroy should be presented as factually correct and that the viewers should decide who’s telling the truth. This is wrong, of course. Journalism is about presenting the objective truth. just because the truth tends to make conservatives look bad does not mean it’s liberally biased. It simply means that the conservatives really are bad.
Conservatives can’t govern. Maybe they can run a business because they lack the empathy to care about the people their decisions affect (”strictly business”), but they cannot run a government. They have the wrong mind set for governance. They hate it and denounce it whenever they can. Why they would choose to be part of it baffles me.
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:50 pmHas it ever occured to anyone that the Iraq people do not want American style democracy?
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:51 pmPropaganda 101 –
1. Have the Media be owned by supporters of GW666.
2. Censor any news that the Government doesn’t want you to know.
3. Play endless clips of Britney, OJ, puppies and kittens over and over again.
Buck Fush
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:55 pm8. — Oh come now, Bush knows that Iraq American style democracy because God told him they do. (/snark off)
November 2nd, 2007 at 4:58 pmbush’s ministry of propaganda must be a hive of activity!
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:00 pmso much to do! how do they keep up?
“White House Selectively Edits ABC Iraq Report: Deletes Criticisms Before Sending To Reporters”
Ah duh… Gee, Ya Think???? Nothing knew about the covering up by the White House.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:00 pmWhat?!? No trolls here trying to derail the thread with off-topic garbage?
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:06 pmHas it ever occured to anyone that the Iraq people do not want American style democracy?
Comment by chomot — November 2, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
You mean they wouldn’t want a corrupt system controlled by corporate interests in which continual campaigning and pandering to the base is more important than long-term policy and the will of the people?
What’s not to love? Those silly Iraqis don’t know what they’re missing!
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:08 pmBush is taking his cue directly from Joseph Goebbels. That TRUTH IS THE ENEMY.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:13 pm“I’d rather ask forgiveness than permission”
A favorite old Texas saying.
They know that none of these “news” organizations is going to run a retraction, therefore their entire psyops mission was a complete success, all sanctioned by the appearance of an ABC News authority.
ABC is doing its part for this Fascist Dictatorship.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:16 pmSOCIAL ENGINEERING:
While social engineering can be carried out by any organization – whether large or small, public or private – the most comprehensive (and often the most effective) campaigns of social engineering are those initiated by powerful central governments.
Extremely intensive social engineering campaigns occurred in countries with authoritarian governments. In the 1920s, the revolutionary government of the Soviet Union embarked on a campaign to fundamentally alter the behavior and ideals of Soviet citizens, to replace the old social frameworks of Tsarist Russia with a new Soviet culture, to create the New Soviet man. The Soviets used newspapers, books, film, mass relocations, and even architectural design tactics to serve as “social condenser” and change personal values and private relationships. Similar examples are the Chinese “Great Leap Forward” and “Cultural Revolution” program and the Khmer Rouge’s plan of deurbanization of Cambodia.
Non-authoritarian regimes tend to rely on more sustained social engineering campaigns that create more gradual, but ultimately as far-reaching, change. Examples include the “War on Drugs” in the United States, the increasing reach of intellectual property rights and copyright, and the promotion of elections as a political tool. The campaign for promoting elections, which is by far the most successful of the three examples, has been in place for over two centuries.
Social theorists of the Frankfurt School in Weimar Germany like Theodor Adorno had also observed the new phenomenon of mass culture and commented on its new manipulative power, when the rise of the Nazis drove them out of the country around 1930 (many of them became connected with the Institute for Social Research in the United States). The Nazis themselves were no strangers to the idea of influencing political attitudes and re-defining personal relationships. The Nazi propaganda machine under Joseph Goebbels was a synchronized, sophisticated and effective tool for creating public opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_engineering_%28political_science%29
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:18 pmA number of techniques which are based on social psychological research are used to generate propaganda. Many of these same techniques can be found under logical fallacies, since propagandists use arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid. A few examples are: Flag-waving, Glittering generalities, Intentional vagueness, Oversimplification, Rationalization, Red herring, Slogans, Stereotyping, Testimonial, Unstated assumption.
In the West, the term propaganda now overlaps with distinct terms like indoctrination (ideological views established by repetition rather than verification) and mass suggestion (broader strategic methods).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
As the 1983 American Heritage Dictionary noted, fascism is: “A system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism.” (The US dictionary definition has gotten somewhat squishier since then, as all the larger dictionary companies have been bought up by multinational corporations.)
Mussolini was quite straightforward about all this. In a 1923 pamphlet titled “The Doctrine of Fascism” he wrote, “If classical liberalism spells individualism, Fascism spells government.” But not a government of, by, and for We The People – instead, it would be a government of, by, and for the most powerful corporate interests in the nation.
“You can’t tell any more the difference between what’s propaganda and what’s news.”
FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein
15 August, 2006
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/08/16/national/main1900602.shtm
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:19 pmYou have to keep reminding yourself this is not fantasy: that truly dangerous men, such as Perle and Rumsfeld and Cheney, have power. The thread running through their ruminations is the importance of the media: “the prioritized task of bringing on board journalists of repute to accept our position”.
“Our position” is code for lying. Certainly, as a journalist, I have never known official lying to be more pervasive than today. We may laugh at the vacuities in Tony Blair’s “Iraq dossier” and Jack Straw’s inept lie that Iraq has developed a nuclear bomb (which his minions rushed to “explain”). But the more insidious lies, justifying an unprovoked attack on Iraq and linking it to would-be terrorists who are said to lurk in every Tube station, are routinely channeled as news. They are not news; they are black propaganda.
http://www.newstatesman.com/200212160005
“Television is altering the meaning of “being informed” by creating a species of information that might properly be called disinformation… Disinformation does not mean false information. It means misleading information – misplaced, irrelevant, fragmented or superficial information – information that creates the illusion of knowing something, but which in fact leads one away from knowing.”
Neil Postman
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:20 pmDidn’t the Bushies just hold a fake news conference last week?
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:23 pmNo pattern here!
“Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one’s self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.â€
Michael Rivera
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:24 pmMedia ownership study ordered destroyed
Sept 14, 2006
‘Every last piece’ destroyed
Adam Candeub, now a law professor at Michigan State University, said senior managers at the agency ordered that “every last piece” of the report be destroyed. “The whole project was just stopped – end of discussion,” he said. Candeub was a lawyer in the FCC’s Media Bureau at the time the report was written and communicated frequently with its authors, he said.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14836500/
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:24 pm“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when
everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director (from first staff meeting, 1981)
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:28 pm“I’d rather ask forgiveness than permissionâ€
A favorite old Texas saying.
They know that none of these “news†organizations is going to run a retraction, therefore their entire psyops mission was a complete success, all sanctioned by the appearance of an ABC News authority.
ABC is doing its part for this Fascist Dictatorship.
Comment by plunger — November 2, 2007 @ 5:16 pm
Read it again (link to “innappropriate). It was ABC that CALLED it. It wasn’t ABC that edited the report, but some unidentified NSC staffer.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:30 pmRead it again (link to “innappropriate). It was ABC that CALLED it. It wasn’t ABC that edited the report, but some unidentified NSC staffer.
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 2, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
I read it very carefully, and if you want to believe that ABC is an innocent victim in this charade, you go right ahead. I’ve been keeping track of their collusion:
The Sunday before the election at 8:30 est, Good Morning America featured a segment with George Stephanopolis pimping his Sunday morning program.
The segment featured his interview with VP Cheney.
The question was about the war in Iraq, and as Cheney was responding to the question, the Images on screen were file footage of the smoldering Twin Towers and the Smoldering Pentagon – ON 9/11.
THE IMAGES CHOSEN BY A PRODUCER AT ABC NEWS TO ILLUSTRATE CHENEY DISCUSSING IRAQ WERE OF 9/11. THIS DESPITE THE FACT THAT NEITHER THE QUESTION – NOR THE ANSWER – HAD ANYTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO WITH THAT ENTIRELY SEPARATE EVENT.
WHO ORDERED THAT THOSE IMAGES BE USED?
DEMAND THE TRUTH.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:32 pm“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when
everything the American public believes is false.â€
– William Casey, CIA Director (from first staff meeting, 1981)
Comment by plunger — November 2, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:34 pmWho to blame, the “media” or the government? You know, I have always questioned the existence of a “free press” especially when current events allow the Govt to invoke varying levels of censorship for “national security” reasons. It is virtually impossible to distinguish between “protecting state secrets” and protecting the guilty”.
As for broadcast news, the FCC has the final say on EVERY word and image. Sure, a network may choose from a wide array of “acceptable” info and images but, the list of possibilities must be cleared by the FCC.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:59 pmJust days after revelations of fake FEMA press conferences and the altering of a CDC report to Congress, the Bush disinformation machine is at it again. As ThinkProgress reports, the White House redistributed to reporters an edited version of an ABC story in the hopes of painting a picture of unvarnished progress in Iraq. Apparently, deleting damaging references to the stillborn political process in Iraq is all in a day’s work for a White House committed to helping President Bush “catapult the propaganda.”
For the details, see:
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:59 pm“Edited ABC Iraq Story Latest White House PR Fraud.”
What are we to do when the entire process of elections becomes subverted, controlled by an outside force that takes US tax payer dollars, offshores them, then launders them right back into the political process thereby ensuring that only their hand-picked candidates become government officials?
When all that cash is utilized to purchase media time to promote AIPAC’s hand-picked candidates – the executives of the media companies can clearly see who they need to support in order to enrich themselves. The news departments are instructed to perpetuate the game for profit.
Our tax dollars have been used to destroy Democracy. The electoral process is completely broken as a result of the money in politics. It is ironc that there is a new cry for publicly funded campaigns. They already are publicly funded…it’s just that the entity responsible for distributing the public funding is AIPAC.
While the vast majority of Americans are crying out for lobbying reform, every Jewish organization is actively campaigning against it – to protect AIPAC’s grip on the system.
Remember this?
http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/101704A.shtml
In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn’t like about Bush’s former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House’s displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn’t fully comprehend — but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.
The aide said that guys like me were ”in what we call the reality-based community,” which he defined as people who ”believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.” I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ”That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued. ”We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality — judiciously, as you will — we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
- Ron Suskind “Without a Doubt”
All that cash leads to that kind of arrogance. Frankly, I’d rather fix the problem now than study it later.
DEPORT AIPAC and win back your Democracy.
It really is that simple
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/AIPACClinton.html
Hedrick Smith noted in his book Power Game that AIPAC had become a “superlobby … [It] gained so much political muscle that by 1985 AIPAC and its allies could force President Reagan to renege on an arms deal he had promised to [Jordan's] King Hussein. By 1986, the pro-Israel lobby could stop Reagan from making another jet fighter deal with Saudi Arabia; and Secretary of State George Shultz had to sit down with AIPAC’s executive director — not Congressional leaders — to find out what level of arms sales to the Saudis AIPAC would tolerate.”
“You are the most effective general interest group…across the entire planet.” Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
“Aipac has a lot of influence on foreign policy,” says JJ Goldberg, editor of the Jewish newspaper The Forward. “They work hard to ensure that America endorses pretty much Israel’s view of the world and the Middle East.”
“A great asset to our country”. Condoleezza Rice describing AIPAC in March, 2003.
“Fully three-fourths of America’s foreign aid budget is devoted to Israeli security interests is a tribute in considerable measure to the lobbying prowess of AIPAC and the importance of the Jewish community in American politics.” — Prominent conservative lawyer and political commentator, Benjamin Ginsberg.
“I asked Rosen if aipac suffered a loss of influence after the Steiner affair. A half smile appeared on his face, and he pushed a napkin across the table. “You see this napkin?†he said. “In twenty-four hours, we could have the signatures of seventy senators on this napkin.†Jeffrey Goldberg (The New Yorker).
“AIPAC’s Israel lobby has the power to pump up to a million dollars into the campaign coffers of any friendly member of Congress, or into the campaign of the opponents of an unfriendly member.” — Richard Curtiss, executive editor of the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs.
“A lobby is a night flower, it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun.” — AIPAC research director Steve Rosen, 2001.
“The friendship between Israel and the United States is a great asset to our country. And AIPAC is a great advocate for this vital relationship.” White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card.
“Congress is ‘terrorized’ by AIPAC… In practice, the lobby groups function as an informal extension of the Israeli government.” — “They Dare to Speak Out,” — Congressman (1961-1982) Paul Findley.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_Public_Affairs_Committee
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:02 pmRead it again (link to “innappropriate). It was ABC that CALLED it. It wasn’t ABC that edited the report, but some unidentified NSC staffer.
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 2, 2007 @ 5:30 pm
I read it very carefully, and if you want to believe that ABC is an innocent victim in this charade, you go right ahead. I’ve been keeping track of their collusion:
Comment by plunger — November 2, 2007 @ 5:32 pm
I’m NOT saying that the media doesn’t play into these peoples’ hands. All I’m saying is that in THIS PARTICULAR case, it was ABC that pointed out the editing that had occurred.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:08 pmVote for ThinkProgress for best liberal blog –
http://2007.weblogawards.org/polls/best-liberal-blog-1.php
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:13 pmthis should scare any democratically minded person:
Plan Would Ease Limits on Media Owners
By STEPHEN LABATON
WASHINGTON, Oct. 17 — The head of the Federal Communications Commission has circulated an ambitious plan to relax the decades-old media ownership rules, including repealing a rule that forbids a company to own both a newspaper and a television or radio station in the same city.
Kevin J. Martin, chairman of the commission, wants to repeal the rule in the next two months — a plan that, if successful, would be a big victory for some executives of media conglomerates.
[…]
.
FCC chairman offers ownership plan
By JOHN DUNBAR, Associated Press Writer Wed Oct 17, 8:39 PM ET
WASHINGTON – The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission is proposing a plan that would wrap up by the end of the year the long-running debate over how many media properties a company should be allowed to own in a single market.
FCC Chairman Kevin Martin’s proposal would allow for public comment on the proposed rules in mid-November and a commission vote on Dec. 18.
[…]
http://news.yahoo.com/ s/ ap/ 20071018/ ap_on_go_ot/ media_ownership;_ylt=AnZ.rZY_l9763zRsqFj4tHKyFz4D
.
but, we all know the corporatists have no desire for a democracy…
…
this is a repost from 10/18… the yahoo link won’t work, but a search on the googlenews will get you more …
this is scary shit.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:17 pm.
I’m NOT saying that the media doesn’t play into these peoples’ hands. All I’m saying is that in THIS PARTICULAR case, it was ABC that pointed out the editing that had occurred.
Comment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 2, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
I understand precisely what you said.
They are playing their role in the game.
The White House approved of their protestation to provide them with some cover. It was all prearranged – very neat.
It’s all complete bullsh*t
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:19 pmComment by impeachcheneythenbush — November 2, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
You can’t stop the plunger juggernaut. “Pluggernaut”? I wonder if he (NOTE: If he were a COMMON troll I would refer to him as “it”.) is familiar with the expression, “Man has dominated the world through diversification and adaptability. Specialization only works for insects”.
I don’t think that his experience, and education, have led him to the widely held belief that concentrating on a single issue, to the exclusion of others, is a recipe for disaster.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:26 pmAll that matters is the result.
Stories that you think harm the administration have not exactly stopped them.
It’s all very calculated. They protect their shills like Lindsey Graham, Trent Lott and the other used car salesman – by encouraging them to take a (temporary) stand against the administration – all to play to the ignorant voters back home.
It’s a total charade – funded by your tax dollars, offshored to Israel and returned to the mainstream media via AIPAC political contributions to their handpicked candidates, all of whom are morally bankrupt or otherwise blackmailable, or would not be allowed into the political arena in the first place.
Israel owns your ass, but unfortunately they control your media too, so you’ll never get the message.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:26 pmPete:
Feel free to point our any factual errors in anything I’ve posted.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:27 pmPersonal attack is no substitute for facts.
Not a personal attack. I’m pointing out that you concentrate on, and belabor, a single idea from a single perspective. There is a huge difference between “facts” and “conclusions”. You constantly spout the same conclusion derived from, often unrelated, facts. It’s kinda like trying to study evolution while holding the fixed idea that “God created everything just as it is”.
It is no more accurate to say that “Israel is behind everything” than it is to say, “Asians can’t drive”. Don’t worry. You do display reasoning ability. When your education has led you to wisdom you will get my point. Keep on reading.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:35 pmURGENT: Per CNN, “Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Charles Schumer of New York announced they would support the retired federal judge from New York just hours after the chairman of the Judiciary Committee announced his opposition to the nominee.
Feinstein and Schumer are members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is scheduled to vote on the Mukasey nomination Tuesday.”
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/02/leahy.mukasey/index.html
Please contact their offices and ask them NOT to support him. I emailed both, and they do accept emails, even though I’m not in either of their states.
November 2nd, 2007 at 7:10 pmabc+disney=magical kingdom of righty bullsh*t
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:06 pmIt’s moments like this which keep me thinking that perhaps 1984 = The (Unofficial) Bush Administration Playbook…
War Is Peace (yep — got that one covered)…
Freedom is Slavery (that one’s proving a bit more difficult)…
Ignorance is Strength (making strides forward)…
If the White House acknowledges that editing the ABC Iraq Report for content was “inappropriate”, then why in the hell was it allowed to happen in the first place?!? I can’t swallow the idea that it was just one “overzealous staffer” acting entirely on his/her own — someone must have approved it. However, this does nothing to change the fact that censoring the report is inappropriate because it’s unethical — not just because they happened to get caught this time. Does anyone here honestly believe that this will stop the White House from trying to do this again, or that the person/people responsible will be fired? Not a chance — in fact, he/she/they will probably get a promotion.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 pmThis is what the Bush White House is doing with more and more frequency. They abuse their power of authority, and when they get caught, they say it was an aberration and they apologize. By then, it’s too late, but they have said they’re sorry and that’s supposed to make it all right.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:44 pmThe creep of their censorship, their propaganda, and the zeal of their supporters is insidious and dangerous to American democracy.
This administration has made it a practice to overreach with their iron fist and the practice is increasing. Apparently no one in the congress has the courage to call a spade a spade and expose the White House for what they are – a growing fascist government.
Contacted by ABC, the White House admitted to editing the negative aspects of the report and acknowledged that it was “inappropriate.â€
Yep, inappropriate — and we’ll do it again, if we damn well feel like it.
Contemptuously yours,
November 3rd, 2007 at 1:05 amBushCo
Folks,
it went to coment #17 untill some one likened this action to one that Gobbels would do for the for the Nazis.
That was the first thought I had.
Its hard to believe that in America, Our goverment “with a small g” should resort to this when it didn’t work very well for the Germans, 75 years ago.
November 3rd, 2007 at 5:40 pm