We should never forget the terrible position the Busheviks put our military and their families in when they waged an unnecessary and extremely misguided war. Once you have fought in that war and have lost friends and comrades and you are taught to hate an enemy that is out to kill you, it is not easy to be objective about the war and the leaders who sent you into war. To have to recognize, and I should note I have never served in combat, that your terrible sacrifices should never have been offered and you are in a quagmire that is very difficult to get out of without more death and sacrifice, the personal agony is impossible to imagine for those of us who have never been in that situation. That is left to those like GC who has shared with us so eloquently today and other days his agony, to try to explain it to us. Unfortunately, we have far too many people in our government and M$M who not only don’t understand, they refuse to listen.

That is why I view with disgust, retired military senior leaders who put their personal goals and desires above their fellow comrades who made the ultimate sacrifice and participate in a propaganda campaign that only prolongs the agony and supports an out of control military-industrial-congressional complex and Serious experts who have no compassion for what they create and perpetuate. They are not putting their country and constitution first as they swore to do. Anyone who wants to excuse or minimize their betrayal, isn’t either.

I, as bamage, wanted to ask 'What now?'. You point out the internal investigation by the DOD Inspector General being called for in Congress. I hope more voices will follow to match the profound seriousness of the issue. This must ultimately lead to clarity, real change and prosecution. I would like to second Pedinska and ask "Glenn, will you and Jane be sending out a call to arms on this?"

And I would also like to concur with Pedinska, that for me too "it is a real pleasure to watch you take an issue like this, sift through the raw material, and day by day winnow it down to the finest points with the most exquisite impact."

For it is clear that Propaganda is the tool of a dictatorship. These backroom connections must be severed and prosecuted, for whatever reasons they have happened. The attitude that, just because 'it's normal', 'we already know they're corrupt' etc., will only allow the propaganda to prosper and its propagators to strengthen their stranglehold. The Germans have not ceased to publicly repeat "Währet den Anfängen" as they know where beginnings end (as Indiana Bob similarly points out in its English/American version and parallels.)

It's no wonder I thought the US Media in the run-up to the Iraq war sounded just like listening to radio when driving through East Germany before the wall came down. It was.

The other question that needs to be addressed is 'Why?'. What motivates such vast numbers to support/tolerate/be blind to this? I can only offer a few thoughts.

As DrEyeBall notes "It is hard to imagine it even being possible." While he refers specifically to the possibility of this happening under Democratic administrations, it is I believe, another reason why seemingly the majority are not bothered today: They simply cannot believe it is possible. The good 'ol US of A doesn't do that, and if they do it, then it's only because it's for the good. But possibly they're just too busy shopping. Or working around the clock at Wal-Mart to make ends meet.

DCLaw points out that the media is actively biased and ready to jump in to gear to defend that bias. Truth, it seems, is something to be avoid at all costs. As truth is neither 'liberal' nor 'conservative', would it help the cause to stop 'slicing and dicing' this one too, emphasizing, that anyone caught offending truth and breaking the law is to be castigated, as harping on the dichotomy seems to just enflame the emotional - non-rational - element that's always on auto-pilot and immediately jumps in to defend the undefendable? I think cabdriver highlights some portion of this emotional element at work.

I'm jumping from one thing to the next here, but I think cabdriver's comment and explanation of the military mindset, also points to the civilian/Congressional lack of oversight that has allowed this debacle to happen.

It also, however, reflects that the military needs to be better educated in the law, because - as Pedinska points out - their duty is to the Constitution. And if they are taught the ethics of unlawful commands, and certain of them act in full knowledge of their unlawfulness, then this also needs to have a consequence. Again, the Congressional and legal bodies would not seem to be doing their duty in allowing this to happen without accountability.

Was it Obama who recently said 'Truth is not a luxury?'. Please everyone, listen carefully, deep down, stand up and 'Währet den Anfängen'.

Also occuring in 2005. The infamous "troops chat with the president" episode:

In carefully coordinated event, Bush tries to boost war support

Jim VandeHei, Washington Post

Friday, October 14, 2005

(10-14) 04:00 PDT Washington -- President Bush sought Thursday to rally U.S. troops behind his Iraq strategy -- and he and his aides left little to chance.

Before Bush spoke via a video link, his event planners hand-picked 10 soldiers from the Army's 42nd Infantry and one Iraqi soldier, told them what topics the president would ask about, and watched them briefly rehearse their presentations before going live.

The soldiers did not disappoint. Each one praised the president, the war and the progress in training Iraqi troops. Several spoke in a monotone voice, as if determined to remember and stay on script.

The Iraqi, Sgt. Maj. Akeel Shaker Nassir, who is in charge of the Iraqi Army Training facility in Tikrit, had only a few words for Bush, but they were gushing: "Thank very much for everything. I like you."

Nassir's comments came near the end of one of the stranger and most awkwardly staged publicity events of the Bush presidency. It started with the president -- in Washington, standing at a lectern -- talking to the soldiers via video on a large flat-screen. The soldiers sat shoulder to shoulder and stared dutifully at the screen.

The president's delivery was choppy, as he gazed frequently at his notes and seemed several times to be groping for the right words. Bush told the soldiers they are facing a "ruthless and cold-blooded" enemy intent on "the killing of innocent people to get the American government to pull you out of there before the mission is accomplished."

Two days before Iraq votes on a new constitution that Bush considers essential to creating a democracy in the Middle East, he said the United States is making steady progress -- both in defeating the insurgents and in training Iraqi troops to take over full control of the military operation.

"We got a strategy, and it's a clear strategy," Bush said. "On the one hand, we will hunt down these killers and terrorists and bring them to justice, and train the Iraqi forces to join us in that effort." The soldiers were in complete agreement.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the troops at Bush's event were told "what to expect."

Before they spoke, Allison Barber, a midlevel Pentagon official, helped coach the troops on who would be asked what by Bush.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/14/MNG6FF89701.DTL&type=printable

And who comes out on Fox News to address this? The guy in charge of the production shop:

WASHINGTON — Pentagon officials are denying that a live video conference between President Bush and U.S. troops in Iraq was staged.

"On behalf of these fine young men and women, we certainly regret any perception that they were told what to say. It is not the case," said Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita.

A live feed of troops from the Army's 42nd Infantry Division and an Iraqi soldier was beamed into the Eisenhower Executive Office Building in Washington from Tikrit Thursday to discuss the situation in Iraq with the president.

But some critics said the video conference was staged, referring to an on-camera shot of a Pentagon official shown coaching the soldiers.

"The soldiers were advised as to the issues they should expect to discuss, and decided among themselves who would speak to each issue as it may arise," Di Rita maintained.

The event posed technological challenges, which required preparations such as advisements to soldiers on which subjects they could expect to be asked about, Di Rita said.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,172262,00.html

I'll bet there's a youtube out there somewhere of the soldiers being coached.