One more example of why I stopped watching television 4 years ago and haven't regretted it one iota. All of my information comes from the Internet. It is by far faster with breaking news than any TV Network and obviously much more trustworthy. I also don't miss the vicarious living that TV forces on its viewers, my own lifestyle is exciting enough for me, thank you very much!

You're gonna be fun.

Have you won any awards of late?

Heh

from Barstow's NYT article:

"General McCaffrey would not discuss these sessions, and General Petraeus said in an e-mail message to The Times that he had no reason to discuss DynCorp with General McCaffrey because he would have gone directly to DynCorp’s executives in Iraq."

Thanks. That's what I get trying to be fast and not looking back at the link. Guess he just wanted to spread his work product as far as he could. Gotta earn those bucks, you know.

I'll bet his posting it here cost McCaffrey another coupla grand...

From Barstow's article in the NYT:

... Given a chance by Mr. Sawyer to raise an alarm, the general reiterated Pentagon talking points about the “astonishing amount” of postwar planning.

And when Tom Brokaw asked him, days before the invasion, “What are your concerns if we were to go to war by the end of this week?” he replied, “Well, I don’t think I have any real serious ones.”

Only when the invasion met unexpected resistance did General McCaffrey give a glimpse of his misgivings. “We’ve placed ourselves in a risky proposition, 400 miles into Iraq with no flank or rear area security,” he told Katie Couric on “Today.”

Mr. Rumsfeld struck back. He abruptly cut off General McCaffrey’s access to the Pentagon’s special briefings and conference calls.

General McCaffrey was stunned. “I’ve never heard his voice like that,” recalled one close associate who asked not to be identified. He added, “They showed him what life was like on the outside.”

Robert Weiner, a longtime publicist for General McCaffrey, said the general came to see that if he continued his criticism, he risked being shut out not only by Mr. Rumsfeld but also by his network of friends and contacts among the uniformed leadership.

“There is a time when you have to punt,” said Mr. Weiner, emphasizing that he spoke as General McCaffrey’s friend, not as his spokesman.

Within days General McCaffrey began to backpedal, professing his “great respect” for Mr. Rumsfeld to Tim Russert. “Is this man O.K.?” the Fox News anchor Brit Hume asked, taking note of the about-face.

For months to come, as an insurgency took root, General McCaffrey defended the Bush administration. “I am 100 percent behind what the administration, what the president of the United States, is doing in Iraq,” he told Mr. Williams that June. ...

Emphasis mine.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/washington/30general.html?hp=&pagewanted=all

It's fourth and forty.

I suspect Mr. Weiner is going to start earning his pay.

Of course, on this blog, he is speaking as his spokesman, not as his friend. His friend would never wade in snakes and shoot his buddy in the foot like that. His friend would have spoken from the heart, not rehashed his spokesman's previously posted press release. But then, these guys all maintain that their friends don't influence their points of view.

Personally, I'm glad I don't have friends like Robert Weiner.

Ashamedly, I admit it wasn't sysprog's flag that caught my attention. It was Barstow's recounting of McCaffery in the face of Rumsfeld's ire, and the time when you have to punt quote, coupled with this from today:

Check Google for the association of Rumsfeld and McCaffrey. You will find 14,000 hits nearly all hostile to the arrogance and mismanagement of the Rumsfeld War on Terror. Hardly the stuff of someone "shilling" for the Pentagon. Hardly the actions of someone trying to ingratiate himself with DOD contracting authorities on behalf of his business interests.

Right. Until there is a penalty to be paid. And, what was that penalty again? Well, I believe it was this:

Mr. Rumsfeld struck back. He abruptly cut off General McCaffrey’s access to the Pentagon’s special briefings and conference calls.

Uh-huh.

~

forgive me. Oy! A demon makes me say: `I've unclassified papers from Suitland, Maryland. It's where the governments store the preserved archives. It's the storage facility. The Trivia Storage.

I once knew a bourbon sipper employee who'd 'dig' jib-jabber.

No worth nothing. Skip information: On MOH sign-off-report?

Eyewitness grunts asked:`Who saw J.B. flop hat on a grenade?

Another interesting flashback day? McCaffrey's father say:`NO!

A bunch of high-rank officers agree: John Baca get war "trinket".

McCaffert was a only one who said to flop on a steel pot? goofy.

All the other military brass agreed J.B. friend was insane. Yahoo.

Nixon gave John Baca a valued Medal Of Honor. Just dust+trivia.

Medals gather dust, rust, and another generation is slaughtered.

Ay! Oho deceive. Just delete this. That's to be felling dead silent.

General McCaffrey has been absolutely committed to objective, non-partisan public commentary on national security issues since "911". He is proud of his association with NBC. His on-air commentary is based solely on his personal convictions and experience. -- RobertWeiner

The focus of this post was not Gen. McCaffrey, it was the non-disclosure and stonewalling engaged in by NBC. Irrespective of Gen. McCaffrey's willingness or ability to disengage himself from his personal interests -- the news division at NBC should have known about those interests, and considered them in its choice of him as an expert commentator. There is a strong suggestion that they didn't. An oversight of that kind and that magnitude goes beyond venal.... into the realm of the outright stupid.

You will find 14,000 hits nearly all hostile to the arrogance and mismanagement of the Rumsfeld War on Terror. Hardly the stuff of someone "shilling" for the Pentagon. Hardly the actions of someone trying to ingratiate himself with DOD contracting authorities on behalf of his business interests. -- RobertWeiner

Rumsfeld came into the Pentagon talking big about right-sizing and streamlining the military. He was disliked and distrusted by MIC types from the get-go. There is nothing about being anti-Rumsfeld that is inconsistent with an overly cozy relationship with defense contractors. That is not to say that Gen. McCaffrey is therefore in the pockets of defense contractors, but there is nothing in your defense of him above to support the assertion that he is independent of them.

General McCaffrey is not a lobbyist. His focus in business is on understanding and explaining the national policy environment. When he sees a concept that would support military interests - he does, of course, recommend it to national defense leaders. General McCaffrey is an expert on national security.... [and so forth]... -- RobertWeiner

Look, you need to do a better job of assessing your target audience before posting. This is not the tone or the type of information best designed to mitigate what you perceive as an attack on your client. It reads like you are just "dialing it in" by cutting & pasting a few paragraphs of pre-written, standardized boilerplate copied off one of your webpages.

I suspect he pays for something more adroit than this.