Is it a still a conspiracy theory when the entire plot is exposed on the front page of the Sunday NY Times? Today’s story blows the lid off the myth that television is an any way fair and balanced, in any way trustworthy, and in any way real news.

Most Americans will never see the NY Times story because the TV news networks will not expose their own lies on their own news programs. Just imagine CNN, FOX News or NBC, ABC or CBS featuring this headline:

Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon’s Hidden Hand

Courting Officers Tied to Military Contractors

The report exposes the complicity of the TV news networks in featuring military 'analysts' selected by the Pentagon to promote Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq

The TV networks will never draw public attention to their complicity in supporting the Bush/PNAC plans for war, the illegal invasion of Iraq, and the continued occupation of a sovereign nation that never posed a threat to the people of the United Sates. No way. They cannot acknowledge their role in intentionally duping the public into believing the lies prepared and disseminated directly from the Pentagon and the White House.

Think about it: how do you get a news story to the public about the crimes of those who report the stories in the first place? It ain’t gonna happen.

It really is a smoking gun story. NYT story shockingly reveals a “’…a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated. It points out that specific military analysts we saw on our TV screens over and over and over since 9/11 were selected by the Pentagon …”for a public relations push to construct a case for war. Journalists were secondary.”

“We didn’t want to rely on them to be our primary vehicle to get information out,”

The NY Times got hold of Pentagon documents that repeatedly refer to the military analysts as “message force multipliers” or “surrogates” who would faithfully deliver administration “themes and messages” to millions of Americans “in the form of their own opinions.”

But even uglier, if that is possible, is the revelation that these corrupted military analysts were personally involved in helping companies win military contracts. Several of these ‘honorable’ soldiers held senior positions with contractors that gave them direct responsibility for winning new Pentagon business. Others held board positions with military firms and had responsibilities involving government business, while several of the ‘analysts’ were defense industry lobbyists.

The outrageous details are in the article. It’s an important read that demands distribution and discussion. It’s another charge on the list of crimes perpetrated on our republic by the thugs who hold the reins of government in the United States. But it will be swept under the rug once again, and it once again will be business as usual.

And despite this story, so many people still firmly believe that they are getting real news and accurate information from their television newscasters. For whatever reasons, they cannot and will not question the lies told to them, no matter what evidence is presented to the contrary.

But, maybe the Internet will once again come to the rescue as articles such as this are read and linked and posted for others to read. Maybe, or maybe not.

I’ll admit it, I did not remember either.  Even though we reported the story last year, so much has happened in Iraq that somehow I, too, had forgotten. The story, like so many others, had been swept under the proverbial rug by the corporate media, and within a day or so the world forgot about the Filipino workers in Iraq. 

But a few days ago, I received a personal email from an officer serving in Iraq and housed in the Green Zone, and the story came back to me, full blast.  Just a few words in the message reminded me of the forgotten horror that must be added to the countless crimes this administration is committing in Iraq. 

This time around, I don’t want the story to become lost in the endless melee of death and destruction that defines this useless war.  I just want to put it out into the public consciousness once again, so we don’t simply forget what is going on.  This time around, it has to get some real attention.

The original story involved the First Kuwaiti General Trading and Contracting Company, the firm that was awarded a nearly $600 million contract to construct the ridiculously ostentatious US Embassy compound in the Green Zone. It also involved the recruitment of thousand of foreign laborers to work on this behemoth that was to be the largest diplomatic mission in the world.

It also focused on Filipinos who were lured by offers of good jobs in Kuwait, and then transported to Iraq against their will to work in Iraq.  I will not detail the entire story here because it is available at sites such as the Migrants News Monitor.  I will, however, reprint the statements of two former American civilian contractors of a Kuwaiti company who testified before the House Committee on oversight and government reform on allegations of waste, fraud and abuse in the construction project.

By Jonathan Mark
Publisher of FlybyNews.com

April 5th 1968 was a strange day. I felt in a fog going along Ocean Parkway to Church Avenue on foot to take the bus to school. The faint memories of trolleys replaced by puffs of diesel smoke; I guess we all have to learn to hold our breath sometimes. My mind rambled at the bus stop, on the bus with images of blurred television news. The assassination of Martin Luther King reminded me of the Kennedy assassination. What was going to happen now to the debate between Malcolm X and Martin Luther King, Jr., with a Vietnam War escalating to make any kid wonder about our future.

School seemed almost too normal that morning. But before long fire alarms rang out and we were led out of school. Word spread faster than fire, a smoke bomb was found in the ventilation system. We wondered if school would resume, but something unusual occurred. On the same side as the school remained only Black students, all other races, it seemed to me, crossed the street. It was hard to resist; I reluctantly crossed, but yearning to somehow convey my feelings of loss with my friends and football team-mates.

This is a message to all the well meaning people out there who try their best to make this world a better place, but in fact have no impact on the world, whatsoever. It is time to take your activism seriously.

The time has come to stop your ineffective tantrums and get serious. There are two ways to effect change when it comes to government: passive resistance and revolution. Our republic is broken and we no longer have representatives in government. Constantly asking our elected representatives to legislate on our behalf is not only a waste of time, but also totally unnecessary being that we have a government that no longer represents us.

Actually it is a Catch-22. We live in a communication age. We have the Internet, e-mail, cell phones, land phones, faxes, postal mail and megaphones with which to contact anyone, anywhere, at any time of the day or night. Still, we are told to get on buses and trains so we can march in Washington DC to tell a handful of government officials who don’t even know we are there to do what they were elected to do.

The only legitimate purpose of such a trip at this point in time should be to remove those ineffective representatives and leaders and replace them with people who would honor their oaths of office and actually represent the people who put them there!

I keep getting e-mail and phone calls from organizations asking me to attend “vigils” to take back the nation. Let me tell you something...vigils are to activism what masturbation is to sex. It might make you feel good but nobody else benefits. At least call it what it is...a whining defeat celebration. Why not use your time effectively, like getting people together to plan real change rather than real noise.

The Vietnam conflict was ended by those who organized sit-ins and takeovers not vigils. The Johnson presidency was brought down by those who shut down schools and colleges all over the nation, not by those who lit candles in quiet little ceremonies.

Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives. US Federal Bureau of Investigation

Read the sentence carefully. You didn’t hear it on any corporate media newscast since 9/11. It’s the official US FBI definition of terrorism. In its official definition, the FBI does not limit terrorism to stateless individuals or groups. In its official definition, the FBI does not suggest that terrorism cannot be perpetrated by the leader of a nation state. But even more amazing is that the official FBI definition of terrorism describes exactly what George Bush did in the aftermath of the attacks of 9/11!

APPLYING THE DEFINITION

• George W. Bush, in his unprovoked attack against the sovereign nation of Iraq, openly violated the UN Charter, to which the US is a signatory. The Charter's core principles contained in Article 2(4) and Article 51 prohibit one nation from attacking another except in self-defense or with the authority of the U.N. In effect, George Bush launched an unlawful use of force against persons and property.
• The invasion launched by George W. Bush was heralded by the most frightening and powerful use of force and military violence in recent history. His Shock and Awe bombardment of Baghdad was designed to intimidate and coerce the government as well as the civilian population of that nation to change its existing leadership. That, in itself, was a political objective.
• The purpose of the invasion and ensuing occupation of Iraq was to replace the existing dictatorship with an American-backed form of democracy that would not permit the emergence of a government headed by the majority Shia religious leadership. These motives were unquestionably political and social.

So, what part of the FBI definition of “terrorism” do the voters of the United States not understand? And what acts of terrorism as defined by the FBI do the voters of the United States not recognize? Is there any doubt at all that the Bush administration committed acts of terrorism when it unlawfully used force and violence against the nation of Iraq to intimidate and coerce its government and the civilian population, in furtherance of the Bush/PNAC political and social objectives.

Therefore, by any definition, if George W. Bush is guilty of terrorism, he can accurately be identified as a TERRORIST. And if he is truly a terrorist, it is only fitting that George W. Bush be scrutinized in terms of his success in that capacity. What is his standing among the other murderous terrorist activity in the world today? Is it possible that George W. Bush actually has claim to being the very BEST at something during his reign in office?

It is our contention that George Bush is the most successful terrorist alive today, big time. Let’s look at the figures.

‘Unpopular’ - un'pop•u•lar - Lacking general approval or acceptance.

Aw, gee.. The American people really don’t approve of the war. They’ve totally forgotten about the death and destruction in Afghanistan, but they just can’t find it in their hearts to give the war in Iraq a thumbs up. What a shame.

It’s so comforting to know that we’re in the midst of what the pundits now call an ‘unpopular war.’ I suppose it’s something like an unpopular brand of toothpaste, - not really terrible, but somewhat unappealing and not quite what the public wants. “It’s not the war, really,” we hear. “It’s the way it was fought.” It’s not the toothpaste either, I imagine, but something about the after taste.

Is it conceivable that that this illegal, immoral war, built on a mountain of lies and deceptions is merely unpopular? Is it possible that the death, the bloodshed, and the hundreds of billions of wasted dollars simply lack the general approval of most Americans?

One has to wonder what would happen in a ‘popular war.’