Exposing the GI Fifth Column

Just when I think the American media couldn’t get any worse it does. I’m not sure if there has been a bigger piece of propaganda under the cover of investigative journalism than this week’s 60 Minutes piece on the Appeal for Redress frauds. If you have the stomach you can download the video here. Let me get everyone up to speed on what Appeal for Redress really is.

Appeal for Redress operates a website where US military personnel can sign a petition to end the war in Iraq. Appeal for Redress has tried to cultivate an image of being a “grassroots” campaign by US military personnel to end the war in Iraq. If you watch the 60 Minutes piece that is exactly what they say that they are a “grassroots” effort with no external financing. However, this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Appeal for Redress was founded by Navy Seaman Jonathan Hutto. No where in the 60 Minutes interview did they bother mentioning Mr. Hutto’s past activities before joining the Navy. Fortunately others have:

Then there is the issue of the spokeman for “Appeals for Redress” featured in the media reports. Jonathan Hutto is described as a Navy seaman based in Norfolk VA who set up the website a month ago. But the media failed to report on Mr. Hutto’s less than pro-American background.

According to his own writings, Hutto “enlisted in the United States Navy in January of 2004” after “working at non-profit organizations and an unsuccessful stint at teaching 5th grade post graduating from Howard University in 1999.” The non-profit organization Hutto worked for was Amnesty International – not your typical volunteer organization. In 2002, Hutto was Membership Program Coordinator for the Mid-Atlantic Region of Amnesty International.

In 2001, Hutto was a speaker at The Fight against Police Violence: from Cincinnati to PG County, Maryland. Hutto’s co-speaker at the event was Glova Scott of the Socialist Workers Party. The speech was posted on The Militant website.

Mr. Hutto was also involved in anti-war demonstrations before the Iraq War as well:

When Hutto graduated from Howard, he worked for the ACLU and then for Amnesty International. Hutto has expressed disdain for President Bush, stating “[Bush’s] agenda is not only anti African/African American, but anti-labor, anti-woman, anti-environment and anti-human rights”, has called the Iraq war “illegal” and the United States “imperialist”.

Here is a picture of Mr. Hutto protesting in his prior life before suddenly joining the Navy:

Here is Hutto now:

So what are the odds that a member of a number of liberal, leftists groups opposed to the war in Iraq suddenly has the urge to go serve his country during war time? Not very good, unless he joined as a plant by the anti-war groups opposed to President Bush and the war in Iraq. Now this is a scenario that has a lot of evidence backing it courtesy of some of the best blogging ever by Greyhawk at the Mudville Gazette.

Mr. Hutto joined the Navy in 2004 and suddenly in October of 2006 he launches his website just before the 2006 Congressional elections. Even more interesting is that he has a slew of media available to promote his website when he launched it in 2006. His “grassroots” effort against the war was instantly covered in over 200 newspapers across the country. If you are in the military and are against the war and started a website do you think you could get over 200 newspapers to cover the launch of your website? Probably not, but Hutto did. How did he do it you may ask?

Well this is how; out of all these newspapers only one exposed Hutto’s website for what it really is:

Yesterday, a company that does public relations for the liberal activist political action committee MoveOn.org, Fenton Communications, organized a conference call for reporters and three active-duty soldiers to unveil the soldiers’ anti-war group Appeal for Redress.
<…>
A staff member at Fenton Communications who requested anonymity said his company was approached last week by a longtime peace activist and former director of the anti-nuclear proliferation front known as SANE/Freeze, David Cortright, to publicize Appeal for Redress. Mr. Cortright is now president of an Indiana-based nonprofit group, the Fourth Freedom Forum, and his biography on the organization’s Web site says he helped raise “more than $300,000 for the Win Without War coalition to avert a preemptive attack on Iraq in 2002–03.”

So who is Fenton Communications exactly you may ask. They are the public relations firm for just about every liberal activist group you can imagine. Here is a list of all the groups that Fenton Communications provides PR services for. I’ll highlight a few of them below:

Greenpeace, Sierra Club, Turner Foundation (Ted Turner connection), Heinz Family Foundation (John Kerry connection), Amnesty International (Hutto connection), every liberal activist group from San Francisco that you can imagine, every gay rights group you can think of, Air America Radio, Al Gore, Salon.com, AFL-CIO, UAW, Arianna Huffington, Moveon.org (George Soros connection), Fourth Freedom and the list goes on and on.

Fenton Communications is obviously a huge media company with massive political power and money behind it. Now we know there is big money behind Hutto’s “grassroots” movement and now who exactly setup his webpage and organized Hutto’s group you may ask? If you look on the Appeal for Redress sponsors page you see three organizations listed as being behind the Appeal for Redress site, Military Families Speak Out, Iraq Veterans Against the War, and Veterans for Peace. None of these groups are listed as being promoted by Fenton Communications. These three groups are actually front groups for the real power behind Appeal for Redress.

The Appeal for Redress webpage as Greyhawk first reported was registered to J.E. Glick, of 803 North Main Street, Goshen, Indiana. So who is J.E. Glick? This person is actually Jennifer Glick, the director of Information Services, for the Fourth Freedom Forum one of the clients of Fenton Communications which proves the NY Sun’s article about the group fronting for the Appeal for Redress group. After Greyhawk uncovered evidence of Fourth Freedom’s involvement and emailed Ms. Glick for an explanation, which she never provided, the organization moved quickly to cover their tracks by re-registering the Appeal for Redress site under a different site owner from Veterans from Peace.

Since Fenton Communications is behind the promoting of this website they have cleverly tried to create a “grassroots” image of Iraq veterans against the war and they are doing this by using what appears to be “grassroots” front groups to do it. This is called Astroturfing:

In politics and advertising, the term astroturfing describes formal public relations (PR) campaigns which seek to create the impression of being a spontaneous, grassroots behavior. Hence the reference to the “AstroTurf” (artificial grass) is a metaphor to indicate “fake grassroots” support.

So now you know Appeal for Redress has big money behind it from shadow sponsors and is being promoted by the biggest liberal public relations firm in the United States that works for billionaire liberal activists like George Soros and Ted Turner. So now is it any wonder why Appeal for Redress is suddenly formed right before the 2006 Congressional elections? Is it also no wonder why now during the debate over President Bush’s “surge” in Iraq a feature story on CBS’s 60 Minutes program is aired? Could it be that Fenton Communications is behind this current media blitz?

If you are still not convinced behind the Fenton Communications involvement in the 60 Minutes program than read what Lara Logan the CBS reporter who put the 60 Minutes feature together had to say about the piece:

“It’s basically a grass roots movement amongst active duty, serving members of the U.S. military.” And “We were very careful to look thoroughly at the group, and to look into their military backgrounds, and to make sure that this wasn’t… people with something hidden in their past or some reason that wasn’t the stated reason to be involved in this.”

She could not find any evidence of “people with something hidden in their past”? WTF? All Ms. Logan had to do was do a Google Search on Jonathan Hutto and all his anti-war and liberal activism before joining the Navy pops right up. Additionally Ms. Logan describes Mr. Hutto like this:

“I’m not anti-war. I’m not a pacifist. I’m not opposed to protecting our country and defending our principles,” says Navy Petty Officer Jonathan Hutto, an Iraq war veteran who, along with another veteran, initiated the petition.

However, Mr. Hutto never served in Iraq, but hey that is a small lie compared to the big lie that Ms. Logan is legitimizing as hard news on 60 Minutes.

I think it is important to note that Ms. Logan is well known for running anti-military pieces including when she tried to pass off Al Qaida propaganda footage as hard news without telling viewers it was an Al Qaida propaganda video:

She would have gotten away with it if it wasn’t for bloggers exposing the story and forcing CBS news to not air the segment. Do a Google search on Lara Logan and read her articles or go to her fan site and read or watch her reports there. Just about every single one from both Iraq and Afghanistan is negative and yet we should trust her reports when she couldn’t even uncover Jonathan Hutto’s past activities when Ms. Logan said in her own words she was being “very careful to look thoroughly at the group” before airing the 60 Minutes report?

I think clearly 60 Minutes and Ms. Logan are both working in concert with Fenton Communications marketing campaign involving Appeal for Redress.

Also notice once again that word “grassroots” that Ms. Logan was using. To paraphrase the infamous words of Joseph Goebbels, if you keep telling a lie over and over again, eventually people begin to believe it. That is exactly the image Fenton Communications is trying to cultivate with Appeal for Redress and Ms. Logan and her ilk are aiding them in that effort. Their ilk now includes Yahoo with the webpage promoting the Appeal for Redress 60 Minutes segment on their site:

The reason the anti-war and liberal activist groups have had to go this route an implement a well organized astroturfing campaign is because of the all volunteer military. It is tougher to create discontent in the ranks when everyone volunteered to serve, especially now that their argument of soldiers being duped into the military and forced to go to war has been proven wrong. It has been over 5 years since the nation went to war on September 11, 2001, which means all the young soldiers, junior sergeants, and officers that make up the vast majority of the soldiers in the US military enlisted knowing full well they were going to war.

So next these groups tried to create a perception of poor troop morale, which failed, along with their efforts to stop military recruiting by attacking and banning recruiters or going after ROTC programs. Remember all the stories of the military not meeting their recruiting numbers a couple years ago? That was because the military was in the midst of expanding the overall force numbers, which meant more people had to be recruited. Now that the force has completed the expansion it is easier to maintain recruiting numbers which the military has been able to do for well over a year during a time of war. Then the media tried to create an image of US soldiers with higher than normal suicide rates, which once again that was quickly debunked. Another parallel effort was to paint soldiers as uneducated low lives that are committing crimes all over Iraq. That hasn’t worked yet either. Is it possible Fenton Communications had any involvement in any of these media campaigns? You be the judge.

Now the latest effort is to create an image of a “grassroots” campaign within the military against the war in Iraq. Hutto’s group is one branch of this effort along with the 1LT Ehren Watada’s refusal to deploy. Just like Mr. Hutto, 1LT Watada joined the military after the war in Iraq had already started. Did he not know the nation was at war? Why join the military if you are against the war in Iraq? It is because he has other motives just like Hutto. 1LT Watada’s dad is a known peace activist who refused to deploy to Vietnam and is a political insider in Hawaii who is known to compare President Bush to Hitler. So who is backing Watada you ask? Well, none other than Iraq Veteran’s Against the War and Veterans for Peace, the same groups backing Hutto’s Appeal for Redress group, which are as I have shown front groups for the Fourth Freedom Forum, which is promoted by Fenton Communications. So when you connect the dots it is easy to see how the groups behind Hutto and Watada receive so much publicity when their groups only represent .04% of the US military. How come the other 99.6% of US soldiers cannot get the same amount of air time on 60 Minutes as Appeal for Redress?

What I have found interesting watching this whole astroturfing campaign unfold is how similar it is to the South Korean spy scandal. In the spy scandal North Korean spies within the Korean political party the Democratic Labor Party planted agents within South Korean activist groups to act as front groups to promote anti-US activities within South Korea. So who taught who? Did Fenton Communications learn this astroturfing scheme from the North Koreans or did the North Koreans learn it from Fenton Communications?

In order to counter the large and elaborate astroturfing campaign members of various milblogs have begun our own real grassroots effort by creating an online petition on February 12th of this year called an Appeal for Courage. In just two weeks 1,197 people have already signed the petition compared to the 1,584 people who have signed the Appeal for Redress petition which has been online since last October and is backed by shadow groups that are using the largest liberal media company Fenton Communications to promote the website in over 200 US newspapers, 60 Minutes, and Yahoo. Despite all this publicity and money behind Hutto’s group, the Appeal for Courage petition is on pace to blow by the Appeal for Redress astroturfers. If you are active duty, reserve, or National Guard it is perfectly legal to sign the petition. You can read the DOD directives and the petition here. Let your voice be heard instead of drowned out by the .04% on 60 Minutes that are backed by an elaborate, well funded liberal marketing campaign.

People, groups, and media like Hutto, Watada, Fourth Freedom forum, CBS News, Fenton Communications, and the rest of their ilk don’t support the troops, and this is nothing new. They are just really damn good at hiding it.

Read more at: Milblogs, Flopping Aces, Malkin, Blackfive, LGF, Ms. Underestimated, Op-For

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

41 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
kwandongbrian
17 years ago

I gotta say, joining the military after being involved in anti-war demonstrations either means a change of heart or some kind of deceitful plan. I'm not defending Hutto but there is something ballsy about entering the military and risking death to make political points against the military. I don't know if he was in harm's way but he could have been.

This sentence from the first quote bothered me:

"But the media failed to report on Mr. Hutto’s less than pro-American background."

Amnesty International, the UCLA, Protest against Police Violence – in a country that values freedom of expression, none of these are treasonous groups so how can they be described as 'less than pro-American'? Amnesty defends people's political rights, the UCLA defends the constitution – I would have thought these were as Pro-American Values as one could get. I don't know the goals of "Protest against Police Violence" but nobody wants to see people beaten or tasered without reasonable cause.

trackback
17 years ago

Dawn Patrol…

Welcome to the Dawn Patrol, our daily roundup of information on the War on Terror and other topics – from the MilBlogs and other sources around the world. If you’re a blogger, you can join the conversation. If you link……

ClearDanger
ClearDanger
17 years ago

Its so simple. If you are against the war, you are for terrorism. Terrorists deserve no rights. I think that shooting each and every one of them and their families in the head is almost justice. Not quite because about about a week of torture is real justice. I am so sick and tired of terrorist lovers getting off free when freedom lovers are killed by terrorists. This needs to end. GI, we need to put an end to all the freedoms these terrorist lover have.

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
17 years ago

Hmmm…

On Hutto:

I would say the Navy is the branch with the least chance of being in harm's way… unless you are somehow against Captain Behindgrinder wanting to share your hotbunk.

On UCLA:

I think they are more interested in their film school than the Constitution… oh, wait, you ment the ACLU.

J!

usinkorea
17 years ago

One of the best blog posts I can remember reading.

I gave it a plug at this influencial conservative media watchdog group.

http://newsbusters.org/node/11051#comment-287893

On kudos for risking his life, no.

Joining the Air Force might make you feel fairly safe, I'd guess as an outsider, unless you went into certain high risk jobs. But the Navy would definately be the service of choice if you wanted to make sure there was little chance you'd die in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Even if you joined the Army (or perhaps the Marines), I would imagine if you had marketable points in your background – like a college education – you could negociate for a contract that could give you some confidence you would not end up in either theatre.

Or, I guess you could also negociate for a contract what would assure you'd get into the fighting.

Your point about not being "anti-American" is fine enough, but it would semantics to dismiss what GI Korea had in mind.

These groups are well known for being representative of the left and further left of the political spectrum in American society, and besides what we might all be able to call good work that they do (and have done) they are also highly negative about US foreign policy, the republican party, conservatives, and Christianity.

I can guess that an argument might get started with that last word inparticular – but if we are going to focus on the ACLU's noble defense of the Constitution, some might argue some in the group are using their interpretation of the constitution to secularlize the society more and more —- with, I'd agree, the idea they are doing something noble for American society.

Rich
Rich
17 years ago

I am baffled as to why such an anti-war guy would enlist. And whatever happened to the time-honored tradition among enlisted men of getting in trouble by way of drinking too much and raising hell?

mcnut
mcnut
17 years ago

i watched this on 60 minutes monday night and it was full of crap

of course they had a butt load of anti-war opinions and then they showed 3 guys in uniform saying that they supported the war

that segment was about 2 minutes!!!

if you dont support the war

dont join the military

dipsticks

its a problem with the generation of kids now

everyone wants it their way or no way

kwandongbrian
17 years ago

Thanks for the correction: I knew it wasn't UCLA but I just couldn't think of the right acronym.

I guess the navy might be the safest place in the military -I would prefer to say, "the least dangerous place"…Still, I'm were an anti-war activist and making trouble, I would look at joining a Republican congressman's staff and looking for beans to spill.

usinkorea
17 years ago

Unless you are worried about capsizing in a hurricane, or catching a killer case of VD, I'd think you should feel ok about saying "safest place"..

And service men are like gold for this kind of thing – far better than getting the scoop on page-boys being hit on by conservative congressmen…

Just look what milage Murtha gave the dems, and he's clearly turned out to be someone who doesn't have much of a clue in his head – but he has the military (and a purple heart if I remember correctly) to shield him.

usinkorea
17 years ago

mcnut,

Kind of like – an army of one -….

I think I heard recently the military was going to scrap that slogan.

I wondered how long it would last…

Richardson
17 years ago

On a side note, I believe the Air Force has the least amount of casualties, as Seals and Corpsmen are more often in harms way.

CPT KIM
CPT KIM
17 years ago

USA is still free country and I still believe that it is previlige and honor to serve in the US military. Some of these people said that they are re-enlisting. Why? There is no obligation to serve in US military. If you do not like the decision of your commander in chief and decision of your elected officials in Congress, just leave the service upon your ETS. Please Don't do the "Kerry".

CPT KIM
CPT KIM
17 years ago

Last year, 1LT Watada's support group tried to get Japanese American Veteran's support and also to use their club house to start his anti-war campaign. These Nisei World War II veterans had enough of Ehren's scheme and tell him get lost. As for these WW II heroes, Lt Watada is pushing their advances back to several decades. Due to these heroic Nisei generation, many Asian Americans were able succeed in military and civilian sectors in American society.

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
17 years ago

On the Army of One:

If it wasn't for big (re)enlistment bonuses, a lowering of age/weight/testing requirements, lots of waivers and an organized plot to get GIs into car and credit card debt, it might have actually come true.

Army Strong? Nice job, Geronimo. You sure held down Grandma… and while drunk, too! But that's not quite what upper management had in mind.

Another idea is to take all the money wasted on changing over to catchy new slogans and flashy full-color posters and, instead, give it to the officers who dream up this stupid shit, tell them to stop by the paint store and then get their asses over to Walter Reed's Building 18 where they can do something of value.

On Air Force casualities:

Richardson, you couldn't be farther from the truth. Lots and lots of Air Force guys die every day… a little bit at a time… in their souls. I suspect it is due to the poorest leadership in the United States Armed Forces… as even "exemplary" departments like JAG, OSI, IG and the AF Academy have been having some pretty shocking high-level scandals over the last year or so… and that type of leadership works its way down.

Actually, lots of AF guys DO die every day… terrible eruptions of blood and gore… HALO on XBox Live.

War is Hell in the AF.

On secular societies:

And the difference between the people who evoke their particular God's will to justify their less-than-pure intentioned actions is…

J!

usinkorea
17 years ago

Corpsmen are more often in harms way

That's because they didn't read the fine print of the contract – the part that said the Marines don't have corpsmen and since it is technically part of the Navy, the Navy will give em some…

I mean this literally.

I joined the Navy back just before the Gulf War build up started. I was slated to learn being a physical therapist assistant.

My basic started just after the air war began.

Just about every class instructor we got would start by asking how many corpsmen were in our company. It was about 5 or 6. They always laughed and explained how normally there were just 1 or maybe 2, but the corpsman school was planning on setting up round the clock shifts. Some would throw in lines about the life expectancy of medics on D-Day in WWII.

Near the end of basic, when we had a 1-on-1 meeting with whoever to recap what schools we were going to after basic, and guys who hadn't gotten a school in their contract but wanted one (and the commander agreed) got one and some switched —– a couple of our brave young future corpsmen —— cried… I mean boohooed…

If it had been a movie, you would have said it wasn't realistic…

It was pathetic….

BesottedTom
BesottedTom
17 years ago

Awesome thread. I passed the petition on.

Skippy-san
17 years ago

Who is more the fool? The guy who enlists or the service that enlists him. Hutto was probably a recruiters wet dream-college educated, African American, who had already held responsible positions. The Navy went and screwed up twice it seems by making him and MC which is a restricted access rating. Probably more than a couple of people were patting themsleves on the back about how they had done their bit for "diversity".

However, all that said, What has the appeal for redress done that is fundamentally wrong or against the law? So they have some wealthy patrons. So do right wing lobbyists and the Appeal for Courage has its own news outlet as well. (Townhall.com and its sponsoring news organizations).

I would sign neither the appeal for redress or the appeal for courage. I happen to think that both sides are probably guilty of the same kinds of distortions of their positions. The difference is you agree with the pro-war side and disagree with the anti-war side. To me its making a mountain out of a mole hill. I do believe that if you actually probe the feelings of servicemembers you will find a stronger vein of feeling against the Iraq war than Mudville and some of the other mil blogs let on. The results of the Military Times polls are probably closer to the truth than people would like to admit.

At the same time, I would submit that most servicemen are not inclined to become politically involved for a complicated set of reasons. Now that's based on a an unscientific sampling of folks like me who voted Democratic in 2004-not because I loved John Kerry so much-but I hated Donald Rumsfeld more. Voting Democratic was the only way I had available to me to register my displeasure. (Besides savaging him on my blog which I did and continue to do at every opportunity… 😉 ).

I think it is a sad commentary on political discourse in America these days that both sides have been reduced to flogging the messenger instead of arguing the message. However in the end, what if anything have these guys done that violated the law? If the answer is, as I think nothing, then they have just as much right to say what they think as the other side. And there are probably no shortage of companies who would line up to astro turf the pro war side…………

usinkorea
17 years ago

The difference is – one side seems to be doing its cheerleading through cloak-n-dagger stuff.

It isn't the money backing them, it is how the money backs them.

It is about fraud – though not in the legal sense.

The charge is that they are setting up GI frontmen who can wrap themselves in the flag to shield them from criticism and make the audience give more credence to what they have to say. The dems and media promoted Murtha to the front of the pack because his military background gave him some level of protection and credibility.

With Murtha, it was fine, because everyone knew where he stood and who he was standing for.

These groups seem to be trying to gain by covert means.

angus
angus
17 years ago

gi korea,

you need to do a little back ground work before you out amnesty international as a democratic party fifth column. if you go to their web site their front page has an article on chinese migrant workers and punching north korea into their search engine yields a campaign for two north koreans about to be executed for aiding others to escape to china. these two groups may not be shilling for your particular cause, but to characterize them as uninterested in china and north korea is a gross mistake at best and a deliberate lie at worst. btw, i seem to remember the aclu defending the free speech rights of the american nazi party…are we to believe, using your logic, that the nazi party has a "secular progressive agenda"? who knew.

Skippy-san
17 years ago

First, they did not prove the poll from Military Times was flawed moreso that they did not like the results.

Now mind you, I come from a probably biased sample since most of the Navy people I associate with DO NOT want to have to go fill an IA assignment in Iraq and are understandably worried about that since their own service continues to offer them up as sacrificail lambs for something they did not sign up to do. Add to that the arguement that the Navy is not playing inthe GWOT is incredibly flawed, given the fact that we only have 278 ships and we are deployed more than we ever have been before. However at least being at seas is what we signed up to do. Doing civil affairs work in Afghanistan or more importantly being diverted from that task to base security, was not what the Navy agreed to do. If they need more people for those functions make the Army bigger……….

I don't understand why you say appeal for redress is quasi legal. Its no different than any other appeal to Congress-which is a right of every serviceman-if that is quasi legal so is the appeal for courage. Its legal and the right of every serviceman to express his opinion.

As for the media, I'll get back to the point I make again and again, there is no such thing as a monolithic media- there are products that people read and/or buy. There are just as many wingnut right wing outlets as left and you, the consumer , get to choose which you read. If all you read is Townhall.com or the whore who is Michelle Malkin, then I weep for you.

E.G. I find it interesting that Politico.com has admitted that Murtha never said the words "slow bleed" strategy, but the town hall harlot has never reported that fact. She would rather smear the man.

I'm telling you, there are plenty of military personnel who hate the war in Iraq. I'm not qualifed to speak to the Army, however I know plenty of Navy people who have no desire to go there………..call that what you will, but I suspect if you dug deep in the Army they too, just want it to end. Even if they don't, the Army should not be keeping Soldiers there for 1 year. The previous Marine Commandant was right when he fought and won a battle with the dickhead Runsfeld that 7 months was enough. That Army leadership leaves them in country longer is a betrayal fo sorts from the flags who run the Army. It's wrong and I keep waiting for someone to speak out against it.

Bob Walsh
Bob Walsh
17 years ago

I still have a problem with someone who joins the military with some other agenda than that of wanting to go out and fight.

I have a problem with an organization that plants a person in the military for the apparently sole purpose of undermining its goals by quiet mutiny.

Skippy-san
17 years ago

I think the reason they did not go after SADR city for so long is that during Bremer, they did not want to pick that size fight and once there was an Iraqi government, they protected it so they would have loyal Shias to attack the Sunnis. Malaki still has to prove that he is not simply arranging things to destroy the Sunni minority.

Sadr city should have been reduced to rubble from air strikes a long time ago.

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
17 years ago

Hear, hear!

Pull out and let them fight amongst themselves while our time, labor and money is spent rebuilding New Orleans or protecting our Southern border from invasion… or even providing cheap medical care and quality education for our citizens…

…or, let's do what it takes to unquestionably and quickly win this war by forcing the population into complete submission of the lowest form so they can be rebuilt in our own image. As a bonus, let the world shiver with fear to take any actions counter to American goals and make them unquestionably understand our iron will to win and our unending commitment to achieve our aims by whatever pragmatic means necessary.

I say, "Concentration!" Not as in attention… but as in density.

While our current politicians, all C students, have their heads deep in their asses, certainly the generals in charge have studied the history of small wars and don't think the strategy and tactics of every conflict we now fight should be based on the successes of WWII.

They must be familiar with such things as Creciente de Valmaseda (from the Ten Years' War), British concentration camps (from the 3rd phase of the 2nd Boer War) and of course good ol' American Style success (starting with Marinduque from the Philippine-American war)… and there are many others… and they brought success in situations similar to our current situation in Iraq by reducing chances of civilian support for insurgents, free movement of insurgents, etc.

With our more technology, both militarily and logistically, this has a great chance of accomplishing our goals of pacifying the population while minimizing the impact on civilians by properly isolating the insurgents.

And, if correctly done, the housing, nutritional and medical needs of the civilian population can be taken care of for less than the cost of the military munitions currently being used to fight them.

Further, with the gradual introduction of American TV broadcasting, movie theaters, sports arena, Walmarts and McDonalds, to the concentration camps which exhibit good behavior, the population can be slowly programmed to accept the American way of life in preparation for assimilation to the growing American-based global culture of non-violent, non-protesting consumerism.

While this may be initially unpopular, as Hitler placed a bad connotation on concentration camps in the 20th century, our current method of warfare in the Middle East is certainly making no friends and has very little chance of any kind of success either short-term or historically. While concentration camps may be considered unpopular now, the history books may consider them to have been the right action at the right time to bring a larger peace to the world, just as pre-WWII military training spoke highly of American concentration camp successes in the Philippines.

I leave you with this…

"As a result of the Philippine experience, the General Service and Staff College expanded its course on military government to include "guerrilla warfare" and "concentration," while two influential postwar textbooks written by Army generals William E. Birkhimer and George B. Davis, endorsed concentration and the "laying waste [of] a portion of the territory of the enemy." As time passed and memories faded, the Army began to forget the role that concentration and devastation had played in the Philippine War. Nevertheless, as late as 1926, curricular materials used at the Infantry School listed concentration as a viable method of population control, albeit one that needed to be carefully managed. Thus concentration remained a part of the Army's counterinsurgency repertoire up to the eve of World War II, when preparations for the global conflagration to come pushed the study of "Small Wars" to the outermost periphery of Army thought."

History also shows failure after failure after failure of our current methods in Iraq.

As it is being run now, with no clear goals or accomplishment, it's hard to support this war… and I imagine the more professional a soldier is, the more likely he is to feel this way even though he will keep his mouth shut and follow order as a professional soldier should.

J!

trackback
17 years ago

[…] haven’t read about the astroturfing campaign then you really need to read my prior posting on Exposing the GI Fifth Column, before reading any further because you probably won’t understand half the things I’m […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] background on this posting I highly recommend you read my prior postings here and here.  Anyway, today officially marks the day the Appeal for Courage petition has overtaken […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] such as Amnesty International planting their members within the US military as I have chronicled here and here for strictly political reasons backed by the largest liberal public relations firm, Fenton […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] Hutto and others in the military are in fact Amnesty International plants in the military (see here and here) that is backed by the largest liberal public relations firm in America and filled with […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] please visit source….For background on this posting I highly recommend you read my prior postings here and here.  Anyway, today officially marks the day the Appeal for Courage petition has overtaken […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] our friends from Appeal for Redress who I and other exposed before. You can read my two postings here and here on Appeal for Redress and their Amnesty International plants, George Soros connection, and […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] GI Korea exposes the media’s agenda concerning the group, “Appeal for Redress”: “Just when I think the American media couldn’t get any worse it does. I’m not sure if there has been a bigger piece of propaganda under the cover of investigative journalism than this week’s 60 Minutes piece on the Appeal for Redress frauds.” Read the post here. […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] in perfect harmony…side by side on my blogroll….   No, I’m not smoking crack.  Just read this post at GI Korea and compare/contrast with this post at Metropolitician. "In balance is the Force. The Dark […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] operatives in Washington.  It all began with the campaigning of Amnesty International plants Jonathan Hutto and Linsay Burnett enlisting into the military and beginning the Appeal for Redress website before […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] smell a Beauchamp with a brain with real writing talent. SPC Jayamaha is actually more like another Jonathan Hutto or Linsay Burnett who are college students that joined the military to have the “moral […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] documents it seems Beauchamp is just a dumbass and not a true leftist plant like these two examples here and here.  He seems legitimately sorry for the trouble he caused and wants to finish his […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] organized effort began with the Amnesty International plants (see here & here) and then the formation of the Appeal for Redress group which was quickly discredited by […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] of the military?  I would love to see him explain the Amnesty International plants (see here & here), the leftist plants, the "phony soldiers", lying soldiers, the […]

trackback
17 years ago

[…] to a protest is extremely inappropriate and is both distasteful and disgraceful. Anyhow… Exposing The GI 5th Column Exposing The GI 5th Column, Again Please read through them both before trying to tell me it has […]

trackback
16 years ago

[…] operatives in Washington. It all began with the campaigning of Amnesty International plants Jonathan Hutto and Linsay Burnett enlisting into the military and beginning the Appeal for Redress website before […]

trackback
16 years ago

[…] It looks like CBS’s Lara Logan was quite a busy woman when she wasn’t busy participating in an astroturfing campaign or disseminating terrorist propaganda footage as news during her time in Iraq: […]

41
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x