Clinton paid the media to publish anti-drug stories. It's nothing new.

I don't agree with this war, but I also feel that we'll never win a war again with the intense scrutiny that goes on around our military. We would have lost WWII with today's media outlets. Remeber burning the Japenese out of the caves in Okinawa?

Mr. Watt,

I agree with you. Propaganda has been a part of every war we have ever been involved in. It has been used against us and we have used it against the enemy. Even though I disagree with this war, I feel that the media should still report the truth and try to understand why certain things are done. If a lie in a Iraqi newspaper saves one American life, then it was well worth the deception.

is this worth fighting for?:

http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs1660

This does not surprise me at all. The Bush administration has been engaging in lies, propaganda and a general abuse of democracy for the past four years. Libertarians should be VERY alarmed by this because when the military/government complex invades the media to promote their agenda (whether in this country or another), it subverts the idea of a free press. If people are upset because journalists are reporting on what is really going on over there, then maybe they should just wake up and face the fact that this very undemocratic, imperialist war is going badly.
Libertarians who support this war and this administration are going against the most fundamental principles of libertarianism. It's really sad to read a comment by one of the readers who said that if a lie saves the life of one American, it is worth it. This is simply promoting the idea that the ends justify the means. This administration has severely promoted that twisted reasoning by going to war and then, when not finding any weapons of mass destruction, changing the reasons for going to war. Anyone who plays by "ends justifying means" will die by it. Look at any point in history.

There's a difference between a necessary lie and unecessary, radical pragmatic government propaganda. We don't need to do this to win anymore than we needed to burn people alive in Okinawa or implement Roosevelt socialism. Just because something is done during wartime doesn't mean it needed to be done "to win the war."

http://hotzone.yahoo.com/
would you like to be one of these in the muslim counties.

Is there a problem with this post

We don't need lies to win; we need less troops and more bombs.

Oh by all means, let's bomb the hell out of the Iraqis. Nevermind that our bombing would kill far more innocent civilians than terrorists. Just ignore that part. An innocent Iraqi life is worth less than an American life. Right Daniel?

Gimme a break. We're libertarians. We're supposed to favor the protection and defense of individual rights. Killing innocent people in other countries does not contribute toward this goal.

At least you got the part right where you said we should bring the troops home. Half credit.

how about less troops, less bombs, less military, less american interference around the globe, and more concentration on making our own country and it's citizens the best of the world in the standard of living we enjoy....through choice and peace.

Libertarians believe in the right to bear arms, right? What is the libertarian solution if we were to be invaded by some enemy. I hope libertarians would be able to defend themselves.

I don't agree with our invasion of Iraq or the prisoner abuse abroad. BUT, if someone were to invade my country or property, all bets are off. I will do anything to defeat them before they kill me. It's great to preach peace, but I hope libertarians will be strong enough to defend this country when the time comes. Just because we are willing to leave the enemies alone doesn't mean they want to leave us alone.

dude,

defending your homes and family is what the military is ACTUALLY FOR. And we are the only political party to trust citizens their 2nd amendment rights in the first place!

A strong military is not anti-libertarian, but a military used to invade other countries under the cover of lies does not represent strength. It means the exact opposite - that our government and it's leaders are so weak as to require propping up by subterfuge and raw power of the gun. Thats for banana republics and two bit dictators, not for the United States...

I already assumed this stuff was going on. It's pretty standard operating procedure for the CIA. Nobody saw this coming? Have we just totally forgotten about the 1980's or something? I mean really, the scariest part about this is that it took people this long to figure out what was going on, when I could have told them from square one. Newspapers should really just call me first, so I can help them get their *&%$ straight. This story speaks more about the nievete of the american public than it does about some "new" CIA tactic. If people couldn't figure this out on their own, maybe I should just quit the LP, because God forbid people this dense should be allowed to govern themselves. Maybe the nanny-state is necessary.

Timothy -

The Constitution Party is one of a few other parties that support the right to bear arms. Thw two major parties don't support it, nor do many others.

because we are willing to leave the enemies alone doesn't mean they want to leave us alone.

Posted by: at December 2, 2005 12:39 PM

EXACTLY!!!!!

This topic is never easy to debate because arguments can be made for each side rather easily. I guess the best thing to do at this point is to sign the LP withdrawl plan and tell everyone you can about it, because so far it is the most logical withdrawl plan anyone has come up with, formal or not.

With that said, our government has engaged in propaganda ever since Lincoln, if not before. I'm not sure if there is anything that we can do about it at this point, aside from voting every democrat/republican/statist out of public office. And I think that foremost, this should be our ultimate objective.

Remember that when we present our ideals and advocate Libertarianism that we come across as positive and motivational, not condescending and nagging. Lead with a solution, never the problem. The future of our party lays upon us to set a leading example for the generations to come.

Sorry for the hijack!

Has anyone here tried a libertarian store at Cafepress.com ? I remember ordering a Badnarik hat and bumper stickers and was very pleased.

Did it raise any funds for that campaign?

Wouldn't it save the LP money and also raise money by using cafepress.com?

Bill

The reason that France, Germany, and the rest of the dying continent of Europe doesn't like us is because their public relies on state-run, anti-US media who depict the United States and Israel as the reasons for all the problems on the Earth. The same is for Al-Jazerra and the rest of the Arab television networks. They emphasize the plights of the Palestinians and the Iraqi insurgence yet fail to mention a suicide bomber blowing up a nightclub in Tel-Aviv or an insurgent driving a truck bomb into a group of US soldiers handing out candy to children in Iraq.

The propaganda flows from both sides of any conflict and you shouldn't be surprised it's coming from us too. I wish we didn't have to bend the truth to get our point across, but the media is so slanted against us over there that we need a counterweight showing our side of the story.

Adam: If you think that either the European media or Al-Jazerra is more slanted (or even equally slanted) to the U.S. media, then you haven't been paying attention to those sources. They aren't perfect, but they're a hell of a lot more accurate than U.S. Media are. U.S. media (including U.S. gov't media) are well known for drastically underreporting attacks on Palestinians by Hamas and other Zionist forces. They're also well-known for underreporting similar attacks in other Middle Eastern countries.

Right now, their reporting is more objective than ours (although granted it's not perfect). We're the ones escalating the propaganda war all the time, not them. If our media were to start providing more objective, balanced reporting, it would at least bring us up to par. It would be even better if we were to do an even better job than them. That's what would really pressure them to be more objective in their reporting.

Europe is not a continent. Europe and Asia are a continent. For example, France and Germany are on the same continent as Israel and Iraq.
America is not a country, it's two continents.
The States has a freer than average press, as countries go, but these days it's not among the freeest.
Most of the top nations for free press are in Europe, if Reporters Without Borders know what they're talking about. Some Northern European countries top their list, then New Zealand, . . . North Korea finishes last(180th or so, labor camp for undeifying wordings, misspellings). The States missed the top forty this year by their reckoning. Not a good trend.
There's no such thing as unbias reporting. The selection of what to report and what to omit is naturally a filter made of bias. For example, the Libertarian Party webpage has only libertarian things on it, and well it should. This thread has libertarian and nonlibertarian stances on it. That's one of the perks of a blog.
There's a difference between bias by ommision and bias by a pack of lies. For example, LP dot org does not lie. Can the same be said for, say, a W. Bush or Dick Cheney speech? U.S. taxpayer paid Iraqi newspapers? Fox News? Where do such as these map out on the propaganda scale?
What North Korean reporter feels there's no good reason to keep doing their brand of reporting?
What libertarian can sit still through a taxpayer paid 'this is your brain on drugs' commercial?

Libertarian TV:

I agree that our press is slanted too. However, I don't agree that it is any more slanted than the hate America propaganda coming from Europe and the Middle East. Let's just agree that both sides slant the stories in their favor, and the public both here and over there needs to use their judgement to find the truth somewhere in the middle.

I don't think it is possible to be completely unbiased. Anybody doing the news, even if they are genuinely trying to be unbiased, is going to show subtle bias in the way they write and talk, even if they don't realize it.

Yes, there is quite a bit of deliberate bias going on in the news, and both the left and the right are equally guilty. CNN is biased to the left and Fox News to the right, both on about an equal basis.

Not only do these news outlets show a partisan bias, but also an institutional bias. It is very hard for organizations outside the establishment to get coverage even for newsworthy events and accomplishments. Libertarians and Greens are obvious cases in point on that.

I think the responsibility lies with the individual citizen to obtain news from multiple sources. Compare and cross reference, etc. Consult the multitude of available news sources on the web. It is ultimately up to you to make sure you are not being lied to.

Mark B. -

The Libertarian Party, the Green Party, the Constitution Party, and other political parties don't get the coverage that is granted to the two major parties. The mainstream media also never provides coverage of anti-war conservatives and anti-war libertarians. The only place that I can think of that would give decent coverage to the groups I've mentioned are the C-Span channels.

Also, the only person outside of the parties and groups I mentioned who tries to bring attention to the anti-war (real) conservatives and anti-war (real) libertarians is Ralph Nader. In fact, he was speaking at the anti-war rally a few months ago and he mentioned some of them by name. Unfortunately, that only got lukewarm applause.

Did you notice in the LA Times story the conspicuous omission about the content and truthfulness of the articles the US military is publishing in the Iraqi press? If all the military was publishing is lies and propaganda, don't you think it would have been pretty easy to find at least one example to print?

In reality, the US military mostly publishes articles about the reconstruction and humanitarian efforts they are engaged in. Psyops units have a very strict code of ethics (I know some of you automatically assume the worst of our military and will never believe that) they take their credibility very seriously and they never lie in the reports they put out. I guarantee you that the LA Times would not have hesitated to print the lies if they had found any.

So I guess the issue is whether or not the US military should be paying to get the truth out.

The US military can't get a fair shake in the US press, what makes you think that they are going to get a fair shake on al-Jazeera? And we know that the enemy is doing everything they can to spread propaganda against us.

So I say yes, the US military should absolutely try and get the stories of the good things they are doing out to the citizens of Iraq. Instead of sitting idly by while an active campaign to slander and malign them is underway by the enemy.

What a waste of perfectly good taxpayer money.

I think the worst of the current civilian leadership of our military.

War of choice and without end will only erode freedom of press, and other freedoms, and further erode security.

Can I get me some taxpayer money so I can advertize?

If this propaganda is a pack of lies, then it will only undermine our credibility. But, if it is just pushing the truth, then it is just another tool in fighting this 'war to win the hearts and minds of the iraqi people' - which i think will take another 20 years if it can even work. But it shouldn't be disguised as independent journalism; that also undermines our credibility.
You guys most know that journalists are not the sharpest thinkers out there. If anyone has been interviewed by these media types and later read or saw that segment, you may be wondering if you were at the same interview. That has been my experience.
Also, outside of the few soldiers that were caught up in illegal conduct, almost every night on the national news there is a segment or mention of a positive note about our military.
I've got to say that I am sick of hearing these certain groups whining about how 'everybody hates us', 'they are attacking our values'. This just promotes the ideology of - it's good to be the victim. and then the 'victims' want some kind of help.

THE INDEPENDENCE PARTY IS GETTING COVERAGE. THE MINUET MAN GILCREST GOT A LOT OF COVERAGE REAL QUICK. AND US> WELL

Steve sounds like he is speaking from real life experiance instead of from some kind of utopian dream land.

For those who want to see an inside look behind the veil of the Pentagon to understand how we ended up in Iraq in the first place, read the article at http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2004/03/10/osp_moveon/index4.html

It's an eye-opener, particularly for those who believe that Bush was "duped" by the intelligence community into accepting bad intelligence regarding WMDs.