A stroll down memory lane

Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

This revelation shocked many.

... many, I'm afraid, too young to recall past Executive manipulation of the media.

Coming of age in the late '60s, early '70s, I learned a basic lesson: the government - MY government - lies. Anyone remember The Pentagon Papers, leaked by Ellsberg to the NYT?
How 'bout Woodward & Bernstein's laying bare the Watergate scandal?

Today, when I read about Chinese spies at Los Alamos Nat'l Labs, or Iraq WMD, or the imminent threat posed by Iran, my initial response is, "Oh, really?... are you sure? ... how do you know?" When it turns out that the reporting is based on anonymous government sources, all skepticism vanishes: at that point, I'm pretty sure I'm being fed a bunch of lies by an Administration wanting to push an agenda.

Maybe this is the wrong attitude. Maybe I ought give MY GOVERNMENT the benefit of the doubt... but why? Through Administrations from LBJ down to the present, they all lie! All the time! They lie for political advantage. They lie to advance a variety of agendas. Sometimes it's harmless, sometimes it's not.

When the best evidence SoS Powell could take to the U.N. was artists' renditions of mobile labs, you know these mock-ups really are it - the very best evidence! - Artists' Renditions!!!

Me? I'll continue to take "reporting" based on gov't sources with a very large grain of salt... and I'll also assume that any commentators with past gov't experience are part of the conspiracy. (Yes, this even includes KO's favorite, John Dean!)

Seems to me MSM could do itself a huge favor by adopting this perspective: if your ONLY source is current Administration - or someone with even a hint of a connection to the current regime - doubt what you're told. Dig a little deeper.

Just for fun: I note that the "state secrets privilege" was first formally articulated by the Supreme Court in 1953 decision, United States v Reynolds. The U.S. asserted that relevant evidence contained state secrets and that revealing this evidence would compromise national security. As a consequence of this evidentiary ruling, the widows of three men killed in the crash of a B-29 Superfortress were precluded from seeking damages from the government.

Documents released in 2000 revealed that the assertion of the "state secrets privilege" was bogus - or at least, paper thin. No threat to national security was involved - or none that couldn't have been surgically redacted. The documents DID reveal that the plane was in poor condition - probably not really flight-worthy.

Yes - our Government lies to us. For petty reasons. Instinctively.

Note: as suggested above, W's Administration isn't the first or the worst... tho' they seem to adopt lying as a first resort more often than their predecessors. ... and it's not just the U.S. government: ALL of 'em do it. The Brits gave us "Saddam ready to attack in 45 minutes!" I noted below that Associated Press relies on Iraqi gov't officials as source for anti-Sadr stories. Anyone ever think of interviewing any Sadrists, if nothing else just to pretend to be practicing journalism?

One of the consequences of this continual lying is my learned skepticism. Trust 'em? Not even as far as I can see 'em!

Peace.