We've told you in recent months about the Obama administration's disappointing tendency to mimic some of its predecessor's more troubling war-on-terror tactics. But is the administration's approach to public relations another area to add to the list?
Yesterday's aggressive push-back against the Daily Telegraph report on torture photos suggests it could be.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS (15) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (5)There's another part of Lawrence Wilkerson's widely circulated blog post from yesterday that hasn't been given the attention it deserves.
Wilkerson, the former US Army colonel who was Colin Powell's chief of staff at the State Department, wrote:
My investigations have revealed to me--vividly and clearly--that once the Abu Ghraib photographs were made public in the Spring of 2004, the CIA, its contractors, and everyone else involved in administering "the Cheney methods of interrogation", simply shut down. Nada. Nothing. No torture or harsh techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator. Period. People were too frightened by what might happen to them if they continued.PERMALINK | COMMENTS (30) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (24)What I am saying is that no torture or harsh interrogation techniques were employed by any U.S. interrogator for the entire second term of Cheney-Bush, 2005-2009. So, if we are to believe the protestations of Dick Cheney, that Obama's having shut down the "Cheney interrogation methods" will endanger the nation, what are we to say to Dick Cheney for having endangered the nation for the last four years of his vice presidency?
Yesterday, we told you that Lt. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the man just nominated to be our new top commander in Afghanistan, played a key role in the cover-up of the death of fallen NFL star Pat Tillman.
And now Tillman's parents don't seem too pleased about McChrystal's impending promotion.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS (2) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (4)Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) led the congressional charge against the Pentagon's use of retired military analysts to shill for the Iraq war on TV -- a program that was exposed in that Pulitzer-winning New York Times report.
Now the Pentagon Inspector General's office has withdrawn a report into the affair, which had largely exonerated the department, finding that it "did not meet accepted quality standards for an Inspector General work product." And DeLauro isn't mincing words about the news.
PERMALINK | COMMENTS (5) | RECOMMEND RECOMMEND (11)The other day, two allies of Donald Rumsfeld spoke to US News, to trash the Pulitzer committee for awarding an investigative reporting prize to the New York Times' David Barstow, for his story on the Pentagon's use of retired military analysts to publicly cheerlead for the Iraq war.
"Does the Pulitzer give prizes for works of fiction? Perhaps they just got the wrong category," scoffed former Pentagon Assistant Secretary Dorrance Smith.
So, as the New York Times has reported, the Pentagon's Inspector General has taken the unusual step of withdrawing a report into the department's use of retired military analysts to tout Bush administration policies on network news shows.
The report, released just days before the Bushies left office in January, found that DOD didn't violate prohibitions on using public funds for propaganda, as part of a program that was exposed by David Barstow's Pulitzer-winning New York Times story.

