-
Who’s Politicizing Benghazi?
May 9, 2013 | 6 comments
-
A Tale of Two Teams and Two Stars
January 10, 2013 | 8 comments
-
Mitt Romney Just Got Himself Elected President
October 3, 2012 | 17 comments
-
Obama to Gays and Hollywood: Show Me the Money!
May 9, 2012 | 13 comments
-
Ruinous Obama Austerity
May 9, 2012 | 2 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Has there ever been a more absurd article than the one Rolling Stone has just published? The magazine alleges that at the behest of Lt. Gen. William Caldwell, the Army initiated “psychological operations” against members of Congress in order to get these legislators to support the war in Afghanistan.
As the Washington Times observes in a superb editorial:
From the tone of the article, an unsuspecting reader could conclude that the U.S. military has secret teams of warriors employing Jedi mind tricks, or active units of “men who stare at goats.” Senior military leaders are portrayed as being out to use government resources and martial techniques to dupe U.S. lawmakers.
This is an absurd charge that defies credulity, and which, as I explain over at FrumForum, has absolutely no basis in fact.
Yet tellingly, this tall tale was swallowed hook, line and sinker by the legacy media. CNN, for instance, “flashed up a chyron graphic on the screen alleging a ‘Pentagon brainwashing campaign,’ the Times reports.
Less sensationally, the story was taken seriously, and treated respectfully, by virtually every big media outlet, as well as by influential lawmakers on Capitol Hill.
Why, even Defense Secretary Robert Gates said it was “important to determine the facts before drawing any conclusions,” reports that other newspaper, the New York Times. And so Gen. Petraeus has called for an investigation of the matter.
Nonsense. We know the facts, and they are these: The Pentagon lacks any real ability or desire to conduct so-called psychological operations against U.S. lawmakers.
What Lt. Gen. Caldwell wanted was good public affairs work — this to better ascertain and address congressional concerns. And that is perfectly legitimate and not illegal. Next.
View all comments (6) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by John R. Guardiano
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/03/01/the-rolling-stoned-media-who-s
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Inside the Gates of Eden
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Occam's Tool| 3.1.11 @ 12:40PM
Leftist Losers. A redundancy.
Grzmlyk| 3.1.11 @ 12:43PM
I'm no expert on psy-ops, of course, but wouldn't the object of any form of Jedi mind control require that the object of aforementioned mind control be possessed of a mind?
Ya can't get blood from a stone, and you can't get squeeze a mind out of a lawmaker.
WB| 3.1.11 @ 12:52PM
Since when has anyone ever taken Rolling Stone Magazine seriously for anything other than articles on guitar twangers? Their so-called "political analysis" is sophomoric at best and they should leave international affairs to the grown-ups ...
Grzmlyk| 3.1.11 @ 1:39PM
You and I think Rolling Stone is irrelevant and sophomoric, WB, but remember - the piece of shit Rolling Stone reporter, the execrable, adolescent Matt Taibbe, got General William McChrystal fired.
Despite the reality that Rolling Stone is a corporate, capitalist enterprise, there are legions of fools out there who choose to believe the facade it shows to its credulous readers - that it's a hip, relevant, socially-conscious thumb in the eye of the establishment.
As Mencken said, nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.
Bill| 3.1.11 @ 3:24PM
What's a chyron graphic?
Tina B| 3.1.11 @ 5:51PM
When Hunter Thompson and PJ O'Rourke wrote for the RS, I read it because they were such unusual writers and took on everyone and anyone and it fascinated me. I remember "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas." I wasn't a conservative yet and writers like these and add Charles Bukowski to the list and that was some serious writing, and traveling.
No one took the RS subject matter seriously then. So I was shocked that Gen. Petraeus took them seriously and let the RS travel with him and get close. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
That such a lame has-been magazine could affect world politics so easily and quickly, in 2010, was unbelievable, to me.
But then I look around me and it makes sense. That's is what seems to be happening in America and I too believe we must wake-up. National (libtard) media taking the word of "The Rolling Stone" for their "news"? That's some bullshit.