Peter the Inebriated has issued his latest edict even Fox says HELL NO
What does it take for the Right to recognize that this Department of Defense is careening into disaster?
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/pentagon … bb20d3f53b
This will simply not fly anywhere…….It's like Pete wants these reporters to be North Korean-style propagandists where they only repeat government talking points. They are basically saying the act of reporting, the act of getting the real story behind the scenes, is a criminal act.
The First Amendment is clear: the government can't stop a free press.
This order is unconstitutional and un-American.Conservatives seem more than happy with encroaching despotism. This is unheard of and unacceptable from any angle. Can i get just a few of the rightwings to come up from the under the floor boards and comment? Can someone tell me why the press is such a threat to this Defense Secretary?
Well, I dunno. The conservatives I've heard do seem to have a problem with it. You said so yourself when you pointed to Fox News' statement.
Where are you hearing conservatives say they like it?
Move your foot so I can get back under the floorboards. The guys you want are in the basement.
GAWell then, they are in the basement. There has been no comment from conservatives who have objections , if they don’t like it they surely have not indicated such. From what i have read, the MAGA people are going along with it. The president stated that he supported it, that represents a lot of conservative thought right there.
You probably have heard what you said.
I was relieved to see Fox News criticize it, and the few blurbs I came across spoke of a letter of refusal from most of the major MSM players. I didn't go anywhere where I heard any approvals. *shrug*
Without using your adjectives, I also think it's a bad idea that won't stand. Here's a mental image for you: my first thought was of Robin Williams in Good Morning Vietnam.
Remember the big twins in the radio station's censors' office? (I think they used red ink markers for deletions. Remember Williams mimicking the teletype machine sound?
If you don't, youtube it for 5 minutes, the clips are famous, you'll get a chuckle, and that's the picture that came to mind.
GAI may have to go along with GA here, at least as it pertains to conservative media. As far as I know only OAN has signed, all the others have refused. Now, have conservative pundits and elected officials pushed back, all I know is that on this and similar forums, they have telling not done so.
There have been conservative pundits and politicians 'pushing back.' Fox had the pundits and commentators (along with CNN and BBC), and I did see politicians speaking out, but I don't remember which ones.
This one generally has bipartisan agreement.
GA
Hi guys, I'm here as the official representative of the newly labeled Basement Dwellers Association.
Today's discussion seems to revolve around the Pentagon's change to its rules for journalists who cover the Department of Defense, journalists must sign a pledge not to gather any information, including unclassified reports, that hasn’t been authorized for release.
“DoW remains committed to transparency to promote accountability and public trust,” the document said. “However, DoW information must be approved for public release by an appropriate authorizing official before it is released, even if it is unclassified.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth “The ‘press’ does not run the Pentagon — the people do.” ... posted on X. “The press is no longer allowed to roam the halls of a secure facility. Wear a badge and follow the rules — or go home,”
Earlier this year, Hegseth announced new rules limiting reporters’ ability to move freely through the Pentagon without an approved escort.
Couple things I am thinking of... based on experience, the Media (left and right and everything in between) is usually feeding the American public a bunch of BS and has been for decades.
Only years after the fact (if ever) does the truth come out regarding what they are reporting. WMDs anyone?
Also, I don't think this is due to the new emphasis on targeting fat Generals who can't pass PT tests or who are driven by ideology that supersedes any other commitment they have ... but who knows?
I do know things are getting tense with China... I know we are doing all the things you would expect to be seeing done (not fast enough or with enough urgency IMO) by a country that is preparing for hostile relations with an equally powerful nemesis nation.
I understand the risk BRICS poses... the risk of the war with Russia escalating... the risk of China gaining access to critical information in the Pentagon goes up with every un-Patriotic person who enters it.
IF... IF...
If we were NOT in the still early stages of WWIII... yes I would be more apt to see it as troublesome.
BUT...BUT...
We ARE in the early stages of WWIII... something I mapped out years ago, something I predicted years ago... something the Biden Administration made all but impossible to avoid.
Yeah... I still see things from a Military/Strategic background... it was what I was good at. I was the first person to ever defeat the folks running the sim center in Benning, broke their 8 year streak...
Anywho... whether the media tells the American people or not... we are in a war against China (and NK and Iran and Russia and probably others) right now its mostly a financial and information war... but its heating up.
And then we have the 'enemies within' that need to be rooted out as well.
So yeah... time to go back to the Basement.That isn't a radical 'basement' idea. I think it is more right than wrong. Especially the "fat generals" part. They were just the 'visual' used to make the point.
But . .. "All DoD information, classified or unclassified, must be approved for public release by an official prior to publication," is a step too far. Hence the Good Morning Vietnam image.
Access restrictions make sense (no more 'roaming the halls'); requiring approval for unclassified information publication doesn't.
GAI think it is particular to those in/covering the Pentagon... I think it is meant as an extra precaution... Exactly what one would expect as we near being on wartime footing.
Access to information gets tightened... how it gets disseminated stricter.You're giving it the 'benefit of the doubt,' I'm not. I think it's a misstep.
Even if your scenario is as dire as you say, relative to public perception (if not actual reality), Hegseth's public rationalizations were the least best option.
It instantly created resistance, relative to an issue everybody claims is core: freedom of the press.
The new 'Warrior ethos' environment should make 'policing the ranks' relative to "Loose Lips Sink Ships" issues a lot easier. Speak when you know you shouldn't and ruin your career. Harsh, but not censorship.
Restricting access to established areas or 'zones' also seems an easy fix. 'Roaming the halls' may or may not be an accurate descriptor, but it conveys the meaning. Reporters might complain about reduced opportunities to casually interact, but the Pentagon shouldn't be a casual place; but, at least it wouldn't be pre-publication censorship.
That feels safe, even knowing that not only don't I know what I probably should before speaking, I also don't know what I don't know, but it still seems reasonable to me. ;-)
GAPerhaps...
I see it as one more justifiable 'black eye' to the media... fake news ... can't be trusted to tell the truth... willing to expose any secret for 'the cause' no matter who it may put in harm's way... or maybe because it puts them in harm's way.
You perhaps see the likes of CNN and MSNBC and FOX as news worthy of consumption... I see it all as dumpster fire trash doing far more harm to America than good... not exposing real issues but covering them up... fabricating lies and doubling down on them.
Whether it is WMDs as the cause for the Iraq War... or two years' worth of Trump is a Russian puppet... or Jan 6th was worse than Pearl Harbor and 9/11 combined and all those involved should be hanged as traitors... we are winning the war in Ukraine and Russia will collapse in months...
It is just constant nonstop BS... unworthy of a serious mind's attention, and sadly there are so few serious minds in America free from its nonsense today.I think the "black eye" was on Hegseth. And it wasn't necessary. Do you think my suggestions wouldn't have accomplished the same practical effect?
Do you think the purposeful confrontation was also necessary to ensure the program could be effective?
GAI'm not sure...
I recognize how people under the age of 40 are processing information and where they are getting their "news" from is very different from the over 55 crowd, many of whom actually think the "news" is still news.
As I have often stated... from CNN to FOX... it is all garbage... it is biased baloney... and the overwhelming majority of young Americans pay it no mind.
You see this as an unjustified attack on the "Free Press"... there are those that will see it as the "fake news" getting their comeuppance... there will even be some that see it like I do, a necessary protection from people who have no interest in protecting military secrets, military personnel, or the best interests of the US of A.The point wasn't about any media, it was about all media. It is also only relevant to the Pentagon (right??). If the 'legit' sources you refer to are fine with signing, they might not be so legit.
Also, my descriptor was "unnecessary," not "unjustified. I noted that I couldn't offer that judgment, but I will judge that "fake news" and "comeuppance" aren't a very persuasive lede. They're more like a choir call.
GAWe are getting back to perspectives again...
From the Trump Administration perspective, all Main Stream Media is untrustworthy, not motivated by fact or truth but supporting a bias or agenda, and the majority an actual threat, an enemy, proven liars and manipulators of the messaging Americans get.
The media has proven itself complicit in supporting a spider web of lies... Russian Puppet... Ukraine is winning... Biden is Competent and in Control... if you review the last ten years of reporting done by CNN and MSNBC... the lies, deception, and manipulation is overwhelming.
Fox being moderately closer to facts and truths... still goes out of its way to avoid reporting on a great deal, it would rather report on the things CNN had to say that was outrageous than on what China or Russia did that should raise the hairs on the back of your neck.
The Main Stream Media is NOT the friend of America the Nation... is NOT the friend of American Citizens... the MSM is about profit and selling drugs and pushing the agendas of the billionaires that own/control them.
This today is where real news and reporting is found... small... private... or foreign:
How China Could Trigger World War 3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnRWEOFB2OY
Keyu Jin: China's Economy, Tariffs, Trade, Trump, Communism & Capitalism | Lex Fridman Podcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y3yAVZk3tyA
How the US military runs on Chinese rare earths
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9wkleHFvo0
The above will allow you to learn something... broaden perspective...
The below is representative of MSM news:
Fox News captures man stomping on Kirk memorial - CNN
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1NOIpxt_YRE
CNN anchor backtracks 'insensitive and wrong' comments on hostages
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOj_LuEuoRg
CNN, MSNBC begin to admit: Trump is RIGHT about this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YTmTto2etk
They spend more time reporting on what each other says... or what some idiot in the street is doing than they do reporting major events IMO.
The majority of them are just looking for "gotcha" material.That was a lot to digest, but you're right about the "perspectives" part. It's always about perspectives. You've ridden the pendulum all the way to the top; your perspective is coming from a different place than mine. I still have questions.
GAGus,
It has always been your forte to be able to drill down into the particulars of a single issue, to break it down and analyze it.
In this case, I think it best to take this issue and add it to the greater quilt of what has passed the last 10 years with Trump... his battle with "fake news" and more broadly with mistakes/leaks and downright treasonous commentary that were made by top generals in the past.
As an example, lets consider Trump's conflicts with Milley:
Milley has made comments that ranged from openly bragging he subverted or ignored orders from the POTUS to slandering him for being a fascist.
Gen. Mark Milley the former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff recounted that “Trump’s attitude toward the uniformed services seemed superficial, callous, and, at the deepest human level, repugnant,”.
On June 23, 2021, Milley responded to Congressman Matt Gaetz, finding it "offensive" that the U.S. military was being characterized as "woke" for including "critical race theory" in its West Point curriculum.
In July 2021, the book "I Alone Can Fix It" by Philip Rucker and Carol Leonnig was published, detailing Milley's concerns about Trump potentially staging a coup and his discussions with deputies to thwart it.
In late September 2021, Milley testified before the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, characterizing the withdrawal from Afghanistan as "a logistical success but a strategic failure" and rejected calls for his resignation.
Further, he contacted an officer of the Chinese army and promised to notify that officer of any looming American military action against China, its forces or its interests.
During Trump's first term Milley ignored, sabotaged or subverted a host of Trump’s plans, including demands to pull all troops out of Iraq and Syria, his desire to put active-duty troops on Washington’s streets to counter racial protests, and his move to ban service by transgender men and women.
Reportedly he did the things he did because he didn’t trust President Trump or his judgment. He believed Trump would start a war against China amongst several of his outlandish fears.
Fears that were unjustified, not based in reality or fact, but a person could have such fears. However, a General may not nullify civilian control of the military, betray the Constitution, consort with an enemy or offer to disclose American military actions to that enemy as a result.
I see many similarities between what JFK was challenged with during his Administration, and what DJT was challenged with... a collective force hidden behind the curtains in DC that did its best to thwart the efforts of both Presidents... they assassinated JFK as the solution to stopping his efforts, while character assassinating and wantonly sabotaging, ignoring or subverting Trump's commands within the Military and various Agencies during his 1st term.
What was speculated about... the "resistance" called for by the outgoing President (and/or VP) both in 2016 and 2025 proved to be a very real effort made by many during Trump's 1st term as well as now.
The Trump Administration has every right, even a responsibility, to try and root it out from every Agency under the Executive Office's control and especially, most importantly, from the Military.Check out this coincidence. As I was reading your post, Smerconish was interviewing Eric Trump about his new book.
Smerconish wanted to make a point about 'bridge building' (it's a good interview, you should look for it, Smerconish didn't disagree), relative to Pres. Trump's current achievements. Eric launched into a forceful (tirade carries wrong connotations) recitation of what 'they' have done to his father, since the 90s, on top of what 'they' have done since his first candidacy.
You would have been nodding 'Hell right' by the end. He got nods from me too, but more along the lines of 'He's not wrong.' (along with a SMH) See the difference?
I was going to come back to your comment a little later, but I guess fate is saying, 'do it now.'
I don't disagree with your points. As a descriptor, and not a label, I also think your idea of 'draining the swamp' is right and necessary. I think 'the resistance' is as deep as you say. It's the 'hows' that I have questions about, and you don't.
The ICE raids seem a fitting example. (one-liners for brevity)
The US pre-Trump immigration policies were a huge magnet drawing illegal crossings. The bennies were worth the sacrifice. (that 'fact' doesn't denigrate the reality of the societies they're escaping from)
That attraction had to be changed. First, and easiest, is to close the border to stop the bleeding. Then, go after the 'worst of the worst.' Those actions are the new message to illegal border crossers, the first lessening of the attraction.
I'm all for it. I also think the extreme drama and broadcasting of those actions are useful and necessary. Perception is reality. We needed a new perception.
But, the chasing of folks through stores, or pulling mom's from cars waiting in school student pick-up lines, etc. etc. are thuggish. Was that necessary? I don't think so. But, relative to 'the attraction' factor, I can't really know.
So I'm stuck. Logic says it works, but reason says the 'means' are wrong and can't be justified by reaching desired ends. It's wrong when the Democrats do it, and it's equally wrong when the Republicans do it.
That thought process applies to this Hegseth issue. I think the goal could have been better handled, as I described. I don't think the 'free press' issue needed to be created in the way it was. But ... once again, I can't answer the 'was it necessary question.' You guys can't really answer either, with anything more than extrapolated opinions. You might be right, you might be wrong, I don't know.
But I do know I get myself in trouble taking positions when I don't know enough to know what I'm talking about. I don't have any doubt about that. ;-)
GAQuestions... concerns perhaps... yes I have them.
But I recognize how deep the problem is, it is an entrenched mindset and way of doing things that spans decades... it is institutionalized within the halls of government, the Pentagon, the media and much of the corporate world.
So... I look at it first and foremost as having two choices:
1 - Go along with what has been going on for decades now... despite knowing that it will only end in our failure as a nation, as a society, and doom all but the top 10% (maybe less).
Going back to the quilt... the bigger picture... this grand idea that is being imposed on most of the rest of the Western Nations... this idea that there is going to be a NWO... an International Authority controlling things the World Bank, IFC, IMF, WHO, etc. was doomed as soon as they allowed China into the WTO.
The idea that China is going to do anything other than ultimately take control of and use those International bodies to enforce its demands upon the world is all but nonsensical.
The idea that the Western Elites are going to continue to control the world thru those bodies is never going to happen. Not now that the World's Heart... its economic center... has shifted away from Europe to Asia.
Any... Any chance of that ever becoming reality relied on the West embracing and bringing into the fold Russia. Russia's vast resources of energy and raw materials would be needed to continue to flow to the EU.
Instead the West, in its delusions, decided to try and defeat Russia... and in failing to do so essentially committed its own suicide, at least as far as the EU goes.
Those very necessary Russian resources that the EU relied upon for its economic prosperity now flow to China and India.
This ongoing war against Russia has done more to strengthen the ties between key BRICS nations than anything else could have done... the relationships between India, China and Russia have never been stronger.
Several other nations have since joined BRICS and many more have applied to do so. BRICS now has more of the global economy and population partnered with it than America and its Allies.
The Open Borders... Open Society... Progressive Ideology that is now firmly what the Democratic Party represents is America's doom.
OR -
2 - Support the Trump Administration and hope to whatever gods you believe in that he can pull a victory for America out of the jaws of defeat.
That they can rebuild (save) the American economy. Slow or reverse the growing trend of nations dumping the Dollar. Shut China out of our Intelligence, our Military, our Politics and our Universities.
Reverse the Progressive Ideology and remove it from positions of power and authority... bring back Patriotism and the belief in Nation, the belief that America is great... rather than America is an evil that must be destroyed and rebuilt... Capitalism abandoned... the Patriarchy demolished... and all the insanity that is nestled in the psychobabble that makes up Progressivism (Leftists) today.Point by point (in varying degrees), each one is sensible. They make sense to me, even if the 'degree' of seeing it isn't as strong.
I started with your 'only two choices' thought and ended thinking maybe not. Not yet. The politics and international entanglements of the issues may be that dire, but not to the constitutional aspects of demanding that the population accept 'declared war' restrictions without officially declaring war.
The ends should never justify the means; your two-choice rationalization is doing just that. If it can't be done constitutionally, then it's not the right way to do it. If a right way can't be found, then maybe the only right answer is a 3rd choice; a different direction.
GAThat would make sense in a country that is not compromised.
But we are confronted by an enemy within that has already proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, that it will do whatever it believes needs to be done to achieve its goals.
Hence, why I say, take a stroll down memory lane, review the top stories that were carried for months on end by CNN and MSNBC ... then compare them to what we know to be true today.
Consider how the Obama Administration operated as it was leaving office...setting up the "resistance" forwarding false evidence to embroil the incoming Trump Administration in investigations of Russian collusion and then the Ukraine based Impeachments.
Consider how the DOJ was used against Trump between 2021 - 2024. Everything from attempting to seize his wealth to have him thrown off the ballots.
If not for Elon Musk buying Twitter and exposing the criminal acts of the Biden Administration and the FBI, and allowing people to have a platform of free speech where information could be shown to the rest of the world... where voices could be heard that otherwise would be silenced... who knows where we would be today.
It is really down to a 1 or 2 choice... as Cred said before I myself came to the conclusion... this is war... Trump represents the preservation of America the Nation, Citizen Rights, some semblance of Freedom, Liberty, and the Right to Defend one's loved ones and home.
Vs what the Progressive Left will bring into being... what we saw beginning in earnest during Biden's Administration of open borders and prioritizing non-Americans over what is best for American Citizens.
What we see going on in Canada... the UK... France...
What we see going on in our sanctuary cities today...
What we may soon see in NY in a couple of years, after Mamdani takes control.Pres. Trump seems to be the right person for the job, and his goals are ones I agree with, but, we have the tools and mechanisms to do it right. Trump has turned the tide already; if he screws up now by over-reaching, he'll diminish that progress.
He has to control his 'troops,' not turn them loose.
GAHe has already screwed up.... Big time. 7 million people got off their couches and into the streets today to say so.
Yes Boston, LA, Portland... the very bluest of blue centers of Leftism.
And there are ten times that number that vehemently oppose what they stand for, at least.Almost 3,000 cities took part... Yes, some predominantly red. maga folk acted like they were dying under Biden, yet no protest of any sort... I mean they came out to vandalize the Capitol and assault the police on j6 but no organized protest after that.
The funny thing, I'm not really a Trump fan...
But he has the support of people I do think highly of, Tulsi Gabbard at the top of that list.
If you can't be, with the one you love... love the one you're with....
If you're down and confused
And you don't remember who you're talking to
Concentration slips away
Because you're baby is so far away
Well there's a rose in a fisted glove
And the eagle flies with the dove
And if you can't be with the one you love
Love the one you're with
Love the one you're with
Love the one you're with
Love the one you're with
Don't be angry - don't be sad
Just remember what you could have had
Consider how the alternative would have been so bad
BTW - Ever hear of the Kennedy-Khrushchev World Peace Bridge?Worst advice ever embraced by tender young minds like yours (*qroflmao*). That's 'settling.' That could be more like Paradise by the dashboard lights.
As for your question; no, but when I asked, the answer looks like there's a rabbit hole in my future. Outrageous or brilliant?
GAGrok saved me a ton of rabbit holes. I didn't ask for data, I asked for a conversation; so it wasn't a bias looking for information.
Dam, the topic and Grok. It was like talking to a real person. And the conversation quality (data and presentation) was great.
The topic; That would have been a brilliant move — a physical bridge or tunnel connecting the nations. Sort of like kings marrying their kids to cement alliances. The world would have been a different place, just as it would be if it happened today.
There's nothing radical about the idea, except changing the world's view from crushing and exiling an evil dictator to an invitation into the fold. Easy-peasy.
You nailed it in a previous comment, noting the European negatives (energy, etc.) of the Ukraine crisis.
Tick off the reasons against reconciliation:
He can't be trusted. Probably
He can't be rewarded for his actions. What if he was only 'semi-rewarded,' like keeping the Crimea as a naval base but giving everything else back? He's proven he won't be contained, and most experts say it is a war of survival for Putin and Russia—he probably would go nuclear first, he has hinted at it. Would turning a nuclear enemy into an ally rather than an enemy be worth the cost, to Ukraine and the world, to fight him to the point of nuclear war?
Just imagine, if the world is praising the Mid-East news as they are, they would either be ecstatic or flummoxed, wondering how in the world this could happen? With such news in these times, toss in the names: Trump, Musk, Putin, and half the world would be in straitjackets.
The only cost would be the loss of revenge, satisfaction of punishment, and the righting of a wrong. That's expensive. It's also probably a bargain.
Kennedy-Khruschev World Peace Bridge ... Brilliant. History shows such ideas work. What a Trumpian idea ;-)
GAThe key has always been Russia... unfortunately there was/is a pocket of lunatic 'Neocons' that have wanted to destroy Russia, break it apart, turn it into smaller 'banana republics' that America could then lord over.
Russia, North Korea and Iran... pretty much the sole remaining nations that were not under the control of a particular influence.
China seems to be using that to its benefit, gathering them into its influence. China has also brought several African and Middle Eastern nations completely under its influence.
Had we taken another route... rather than trying to destroy Russia had America/NATO instead brought them into the fold... the EU would be far stronger economically today, and China would be in a far weaker position.
I don't even think this is really 'our' plan... I think it is/was heavily influenced and/or controlled by the UK... which is run by a bunch of incompetent and out of touch imbeciles throughout its government and military today.
You could say the overwhelming majority of America's allies are liabilities... resource wise... militarily wise... they offer us little.
China in comparison now has strong ties to Iran and Russia... both provide a wealth of energy and raw materials, as do the African and Middle Eastern nations that are now tied to them.
Let’s face it GA, you have always been a hard right conservative type. There was never a chance that we would see much of anything in the same light, two parallel lines distanced apart without any chance of intersection. Support for Trump is not moderate.
Trump is the wrong person for the job, period. He is creating more problems than he solves and will be a source of division that will take this country to the very edge. I don’t like the conservative mantra generally, but the GOP could have selected a less abrasive candidate, and I hold that against them. I disagree with the man, his goals, his tools and mechanisms. But, his form of conservatism seems to be where you are comfortable.
This has always been you from the very beginning of our interchanges, in reality. I just never wanted to have to say as much. Conservative and progressive liberals have NOTHING in common, no more than oil and vinegar can mix.Hard right seems a little harsh. Confirmed Conservative feels like a better fit. What comes after 'Hard Right,' Zealot or Idiot (I know Extremist comes after them)? Am I one step below idiot or before zealot?
Just as a rhetorical poke; which president do you think has had more control of the nation, and the world, at this stage?
You've seen the posted lists. Bullet point by bullet point, almost every one gets grudging nods — across the board. There is always hell to scream in the details, and partisan 'yeah buts ...', but the results are tough to argue.
Your closing is (just for you) 'bullshyte.' I recall many thread discussions where you ended with something like; 'Well ok, if it doesn't do whatever, then maybe it's ok.' (big issues like voter ID, etc.) We didn't always end up on opposite sides.
The real flaw is equating support for a policy to support for a person. That's a 'team' error.
GAI may renege on my ok on voter ID as republicans are cheating with their reapportionment of congressional seats on the behest of Trump. And I only agreed with you regarding Voter ID only when the most stringent of conditions be met. So, it is not so much an agreement as it was a serious compromise.
In the Trump universe, there is not much daylight between support of his policies and support for him. To me, you are all one and the same.Compromise works for me. Considering, as I recall, I was able to show that government actions and programs were meeting all your "serious" objections/worries, and you moved from 'No way' to Well, ok, as long as ...
Yep, that was a serious compromise from you.
psst ... Do we all look alike to you too?
GA ;-)I agree to a compromise, but i don’t recall the government operating under the terms of my compromise. It was a wish list. Rightwingers are never going to make it easy for their opposers to vote.
psst ... Do we all look alike to you too?
Yeah, you do….
From what I read of your comments, hard-right seems correct if by hard-right we mean somebody like Liz Cheney. After hard-right comes authoritarian and then fascists.
Okay, Hard Right it is. I liked Liz Cheney.
I think I'll be able to spot zealotry (I know a good comparative), but I hope someone gives me a heads up when I'm about to teeter into 'idiot.'*
*You know "idiot" is one of my favorite descriptors. It's elastic and versatile, so consider it broadly when thinking about me. I probably fit.
GADidn't Liz and Dick Cheney support the Harris campaign?
Dick Cheney Reveals His Reason for Endorsing Kamala Harris
https://time.com/7018941/dick-cheney-re … ald-trump/
Liz Cheney campaigns with Kamala Harris for first time
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-har … publicans/
Cheney's Halliburton Made $39.5 Billion on Iraq War
https://readersupportednews.org/news-se … n-iraq-war
Contractors reap $138bn from Iraq war
https://www.ft.com/content/7f435f04-8c0 … 144feabdc0
Yeah... funny how people on the Left used to despise Cheney (both) but don't even question when the people they had thought were evil join 'their side'.
Things that should make you go ..... hmmmmmmmmmmm?That's a lot of guilt by association. The Liz Cheney part was tied to the Hard Right claim—neither are true. I have very little thought about her, other than being her father's daughter.
GAThey sure did. Why? Because they love America and wanted to save it from the destruction Trump, the enemy of the People, is now causing.
It is funny how some people make assumptions that some people are "evil" when it isn't necessarily true. I did not agree with Cheney's (both) politics but I did see them as true patriots (just with the wrong solutions).
We do see some people as intrinsically evil when their actions require that judgement.
you are awesome!
* ahem * Gus... like I said. ... Perfect example of the point I was trying to make.
It is really down to a 1 or 2 choice... as Cred said before I myself came to the conclusion... this is war... Trump represents the preservation of America the Nation, Citizen Rights, some semblance of Freedom, Liberty, and the Right to Defend one's loved ones and home.
Vs what the Progressive Left will bring into being... what we saw beginning in earnest during Biden's Administration of open borders and prioritizing non-Americans over what is best for American Citizens.
———-
I see it just the opposite, Trump is a dangerous authoritarian threat blurring the lines between the proper separation of powers. Trump represents the very darkest of American culture and values and gives permission to his lemming like followers to express the same openly.
Rest assured that such a war if it comes will cost each side enough of its entrails to result in a fatal injuries. America will lose its prominence in the world, and if the Right prevails, we would be no better than South Africa before the 1990s. The 250 anniversary will be for naught, as Benjamin Franklin have been proven to be correct, government by the people will not be sustainable. Get ready for “Mad Max under the Thunderdome”. So much for the late, great United States of America. An insular, provincial tyrannical dictatorship well below world class standing, and its coming.I know you see it that way... and as I explained in detail in another post to you in another thread a few days back, I understand why.
It took me roughly from around 1996 when I first had my eyes slapped open and I really started to question... all the way to 2020... the Lockdowns... the hysteria on MSM ... people who didn't take the vaccine deserved to die... people should not have the right to refuse, it should be mandatory, etc. etc.
I am free of it... it is a blessing I suppose.
Had I lived your life... had I experienced the 60s as you had... I doubt even all the experiences I have had, and all the research I have done, would have been enough... I don't think I could risk it.
I can only imagine how bad the country looks through your eyes right now, understanding your perspective to the extent that I do.
All I can say is that I believe what is best for every American Citizen, regardless of race, is not what has been offered by the Democratic Party.., I think they are offering the destruction of the Nation and the good things it has stood for... it would result, ultimately, in our nation being subservient to outside forces, and the Constitution meaning nothing for any of us.Had I lived your life... had I experienced the 60s as you had... I doubt even all the experiences I have had, and all the research I have done, would have been enough... I don't think I could risk it.
——————-
It is good that at least you understand where I stand and why. That is more than I can say for most of your conservative brood. I wasn’t at the forefront of the 1960’s movements. I just a kid, but a precocious one and a voracious reader, grabbing all the Ebony and Jet magazines on my mom’s coffee table, following the struggles in far off places.
You and I each believe in a different America, as a result; we have divergent views today as well as our expectations for the future,Credence, you and I believe in a free, liberal America that wants to protect the rights and freedoms of all people.
I always have, I am just appalled that so few of our fellow citizens have the same opinion….
If you have time or the inclination pick up a copy of Politics, Lies, and Conspiracy Theories: A Cognitive Linguistic Perspective. You will understand why MAUGA is the way it is and why there if virtually no chance of saving them from themselves.
All we can do is fight the lies and false metaphors with the Truth and our own honest metaphors like Donald "the enemy of the people" Trump.
I watched it.
I can see why you agree with much of what Smerconish said... he is actually brilliant in that part, advocating on the behalf of the Leftists, and then after that minutes long spiel he let Eric have his say, which was a tirade rather than a response or reply to what Smerconish proposed.
Smerconish came across as rational and reasonable... Eric close to unhinged in his response.
But I think the truth of the matter is there was compromise... and now the Democrats are holding American workers hostage trying to get unreasonable, and for the majority of Americans unwanted, expenses thrown back in... 1.5 trillion worth.
So there is little to compromise on... and the Democrats will not be willing to give on any of it if they think they will net a political gain by staying the course.
Ultimately, as I have stated in more than one post in this thread, there are two drastically different courses the two sides want to pursue... and the Leftists side has already shown there is no limit to what they are willing to do... there is no line they would not cross... there is no evil that is too evil.
Where there was once the ability to negotiate between the two parties when they both, ultimately, had what was the best interests of America and Americans in mind is no longer the case... that was many years ago.
What the Progressive Left represents has little if anything on its agenda that could be considered what is best for America or American Citizens.
Studies show that the highest sources of Fake News/disinformation/misinformation are TikTok/Instagram/YouTube/podcasts and influencers.
The next highest is right-wing media sources
The lowest is MSM.
https://www.odg.it/wp-content/uploads/2 … ressed.pdf
It has been my observation that 60% - 75% of all fake news comes from the right.
Ken, I believe Secretary Hegseth’s new rules, both on military discipline and on press access, are a breath of fresh air, because they’re common-sense measures grounded in order, accountability, and responsibility. Concerning press access at the Pentagon, the requirement that journalists sign a pledge not to gather unapproved information (even if unclassified), plus the restriction of unescorted movement through certain areas, makes sense when viewed through the lens of national security. It’s reasonable that areas housing sensitive operations or leadership, offices of the Secretary, senior aides, the Joint Chiefs, etc., should require oversight or escort, just as other secure facilities do. Requiring visible badges and clearer identifiers for press is also common sense; knowing who has access and ensuring credentials are clear helps maintain security while still allowing transparency.
The idea that access is a privilege, not a right, is not about suppressing journalism but about striking a balance: the public deserves accountability, but the military has legitimate secrets and operational details that, if leaked, could compromise safety or strategy. By setting clear rules, Hegseth ensures that reporters understand where the lines are, which helps prevent accidental leaks and reduces confusion. In my view, these changes reinforce professionalism all around, both within the Pentagon and in journalism, by holding everyone to defined standards. I support these press-rules because they help preserve both security and credible reporting.Pure fascism..government control over information and the suppression of independent news are hallmarks of authoritarian and fascist regimes....
But yeah, that's what pleases some... Suppression and intimidation of opposition. America under Trump is fully fascist
Oh, I just have to jump in—normally, I write mile-long comments, but not this time… no need. First, the article was from Huff&Puff Post, and by the second paragraph, seeing the word “outrageous” told me it was over. Ken, I only need one word to respond to your view—BINGO!
Can’t you see what drunky Petey is doing? Why should any press organization allow themselves to be spoon fed by the defense department? The conservatives irritate me so often. This has never been done before and you all act as if it is not a “big deal”. Well, i think that one of the largest recipients of our tax money needs to have oversight and be held accountable for its actions. How can your people so easily succumb to tyranny?
You are voicing concerns from a civilian perspective... You know better, or should.
I see this as the steps a government takes when it knows war is at hand. And when you are trying to shut down the flow of information to foreign enemies that until recently flowed far more freely than it should have.
Sad that today we depend on China for about 80% of the replacement parts for our military equipment...
Sad that so many of China's military vehicles show very similar (if not exact) advances that we see in our most advanced military designs.
Recently during that massive military parade China had that NK, Russia, and other world leaders attended, Chinese outlets noted/bragged they had reverse engineered what we have so that they could develop the perfect missiles and torpedoes to destroy our fleets and ground forces.We are talking about unclassified information, Ken, and we have had war and war being imminent before, Pete is making an excuse not to be candid where every defense department before him never needed to muzzle the press. What does China and North Korea have to do with it? Why should I just take Hegseth’s word on anything?
We are talking about people who have access inside the Pentagon getting approval of information they are going to release to the rest of the world ahead of doing so.
If they can't tolerate the Pentagon double checking to ensure no critical information is being released (as HAS happened recently) in an effort for some biased journalist to 'score points' against the Trump Administration or to 'gain notoriety'... and in doing so putting US Forces at risk, or compromising ongoing military operations... tough F'n Shit.
We are not at peace... we are at war with MULTIPLE nations... whether you want to accept that fact or not... whether your beloved Leftwing Lunacy Media tells you this or not.Sorry, Ken, to reminisce, but I loved this and the attitude of a real leader that was behind it. Who after the Bay of Pigs disaster owned up to it, took responsibility without coverups, excuses or blaming others. Where has all of that gone? He was never afraid of the challenge posed by the press.
———
During an April 1961 address to the American Newspaper Publishers Association, John F. Kennedy said his administration intended to "be candid about its errors". He emphasized that acknowledging mistakes is crucial for success and that a democracy cannot survive without debate and criticism.
Key points from Kennedy's address
Kennedy stated that his administration would be open about its errors, referencing the idea that an error becomes a mistake only when not corrected.
He emphasized that they would accept responsibility for their errors and expected the press and public to highlight them.
Kennedy stressed that debate and criticism are essential for the success of any administration and the survival of a republic. He also welcomed controversy among newspaper readers.
The speech criticized censorship and secrecy, with Kennedy stating that no official should use his words as justification to censor news, stifle dissent, hide mistakes, or withhold facts.
This address occurred during the Cold War, shortly after the Bay of Pigs invasion, for which Kennedy took responsibility.
—————-
Why would you accept the principle of accountability and oversight regarding candid information about how that department is being run solely from the Department Head? Why would I expect him to rely honestly and accurate information if it would lead to criticism?
In my world, there can be no entity in government that is above the need for oversight, and the press is part of that. Every relevant press organization is walking out of DOD and will do the needed investigative reporting from a safe distance, and it will not stop. This is going to blow up in Hegseth”s face, you can count on it. There is a difference between classified information and information that it is not convenient for Hegseth and his department to release. Otherwise, how is the agency being held accountable, I don’t trust Trump to rein anything in? We cannot use military exigency as some cavalier excuse to censor information from the public. This is an ominous trend that is pure Trump and will be criticized and challenged by the left and even moderates.
I thought that you said that Biden was responsible for all the wars, so now under Trump we are at war with multiple nations?JFK was a great leader a great politician... but he was fallible...
Choosing to promise to tear the CIA into a thousand pieces while assigning RFK to tear apart the Mob...
That openness... didn't serve him so well. Not recognizing that there were those willing to do whatever it took... that there was an enemy within just as (if not more) dangerous than the foreign ones outside our borders.
Do you remember when this happened?
Did a Text Message Just Compromise U.S. Military Operations?
https://www.republicworld.com/defence/g … ntrol-mode
The situation took a bizarre turn when it was revealed that The Atlantic’s Editor-in-Chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, was accidentally included in the chat, giving the press a front-row seat to sensitive military discussions.
Goldberg wrote that the conversation in the Signal group chat culminated in Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth sharing highly sensitive and classified details about the Pentagon's plan to carry out military air strikes against the Houthis, who have been launching attacks on Western commercial vessels in the Red Sea for more than a year.
Goldberg wrote that it started on Tuesday, March 11, when he got a request to connect from someone identified as "Michael Waltz."
Mike Waltz is President Donald Trump's national security adviser.
Two days later, on March 13, Goldberg said the user identified as Waltz added him to a Signal group chat called "Houthi PC small group."
The user sent the following message to the group, according to Goldberg: "Team – establishing a principles [sic] group for coordination on Houthis, particularly for over the next 72 hours. My deputy Alex Wong is pulling together a tiger team at deputies/agency Chief of Staff level following up from the meeting in the [Situation Room] this morning for action items and will be sending that out later this evening."
A minute after "Michael Waltz" sent the message, a Signal user identified as "MAR" wrote, "Mike Needham for State." Trump's secretary of state is Marco Antonio Rubio.
Another user identifed as "JD Vance" chimed in with who would represent the "VP," and one minute later, someone with the initials "TG" wrote, "Joe Kent for [the Director of National Intelligence]."
Trump's DNI is former Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard.
Shortly after, a Signal user identified as "Pete Hegseth" wrote that someone named Dan Caldwell would be in for "DoD," referring to the Pentagon.
Several other users on the chain also replied with the names of people who would represent the Treasury secretary, the National Security Council and the CIA in the discussions.
Goldberg wrote that he was deeply skeptical at first that the group chat was legitimate because he couldn't fathom that senior U.S. national security officials, Cabinet secretaries and the vice president would be so reckless as to accidentally include a journalist in the message chain.
The officials discussed specific plans being drawn up to bomb Houthi targets in Yemen over the next two days, debating the pros and cons of carrying out the strikes. The user identified as Vice President Vance, notably, deviated from Trump's position on the strikes and said he thought the administration was "making a mistake."
He said he wasn't sure Trump was "aware how inconsistent this is with his message on Europe right now," per The Atlantic.
The person identifying as Vance went on to say he was "willing to support the consensus of the team" and keep his concerns to himself, but added that he felt there was a "strong argument for delaying this a month, doing the messaging work on why this matters, seeing where the economy is, etc."
Hegseth disagreed, writing that delaying the bombing campaign would "not fundamentally change the calculus."
He went on to write that if the administration waited on launching the strikes, there was a risk that the plan could leak and that "we look indecisive."
"We are prepared to execute, and if I had final go or no go vote, I believe we should," Hegseth wrote, according to Goldberg. "This [is] not about the Houthis. I see it as two things: 1) Restoring Freedom of Navigation, a core national interest; and 2) Reestablish deterrence, which [former President Joe Biden] cratered. "But, we can easily pause. And if we do, I will do all we can to enforce 100% [operations security]."
Operations security, or OPSEC, refers to the process of concealing critical information about a person, plan or conversation in order to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive data.
On Friday, March 15, at 11:44 a.m. ET, the user identified as Hegseth sent a "team update" in which he disclosed what Goldberg described as "operational details of forthcoming strikes on Yemen, including information about targets, weapons the U.S. would be deploying, and attack sequencing."
They went on to say that the first explosions in Yemen would be heard two hours later, at 1:45 p.m. ET., according to Goldberg.
At 1:55 p.m. ET, Goldberg saw reports on social media that explosions were being heard in the capital city of Sanaa.
-----
It's obviously a very serious mistake whoever included Goldberg in this chain-of-command messaging that involved war plans.
To have had somebody from The Atlantic on that chain, without question, was a f-up.
The White House obviously took that seriously... and this may be one such measure to ensure that such information never sees the light of day again while this Administration is running things. The last thing you want to do when you're talking about war plans is to have a serious leak like this that could undermine those plans and also jeopardize lives.Are you saying that breach was the reporters fault? Shouldn't Hagseth been fired?
If you look into it, you will find that the breach was not caused by Hegseth, but someone else entirely.
It was Hegseth that talked about classified information on what he knew to be unsecure communications. He should have been fired for that.
That is what Putin does in an autocratic society.
So you are thinking Trump is going to start a war?
I think war was declared on America decades ago.
Understanding how China's global agendas compete with our own.
https://odi.org/en/about/our-work/globa … nitiative/
Disrupting the world’s money: China’s ambitions for global finance
https://odi.org/en/publications/chinas- … l-finance/
China's 30-year ROADMAP: Overtake USA and DOMINATE world with military 'built FOR WAR'
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/86 … -dominance
China military parade 2025 LIVE: Putin, Kim Jong Un attend as weapons on display
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aH6rGs-_Q4
China Aims for Total World Domination by 2050
https://www.energyandcapital.com/china- … n-by-2050/
Three years of war in Ukraine: the Chinese-Russian alliance passes the test
https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/os … asses-test
The BRICS summit in Rio shows that the group is more economically significant and politically present than ever before
https://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/econo … nger-8401/
BRICS and the Russia-Ukraine war: A global rebalance?
https://saiia.org.za/research/a-global-rebalance/I see economic competition not a shooting war between the US and China/Russia.
Well, one thing leads to another... that is the cause of all wars, need for resources, land, etc.... right?
Sure people kill other people because of religion, or race... but in general, in modern times, wars are about resources and access to the sea (land).
For instance... consider China's new threat to the world related to Rare Earth Minerals, a resource, one that ups the chances of a physical war:
https://youtu.be/IPQtYj1L_hs?t=51
Timestamped to the relevant issue.So, are you saying we are in economic competition and that it might lead to WW III at some point in time?
I am saying we are already in WWIII and have been for a while.
Whether or not Congress declares it so... it means nothing to those nations working 24/7 to undermine, overcome, and/or destroy America.
WWII started "officially" on Sept 1 1939... America entered it more than two years later on Dec 8 1941.
However Japan's war against China started July 7 1937...
Germany occupied Czechoslovakia in March 1939, following the annexation of the Sudetenland in 1938...
So there were events that were related to, or part of, WWII long before it was declared a war by America in on the eve of 1942.
Such is the situation now. The wars ongoing against Iran and Ukraine... the growing power and influence of BRICS since the Ukraine war began...
And now the efforts by China to restrict access to vital materials and resources and their threat to take Taiwan which supplies 90% of the world's most advanced chips... while also backing both Iran and Russia in the ongoing wars...
So you tell me... when you evaluate the facts... are we in WWIII?So, to you, any economic competition is a hot World War? Is that what I hear you saying?
In my view, a real World War is:
1. A world war is a large-scale armed conflict that:
2. Involves multiple great powers (or most of them) fighting in opposed alliance blocs,
3. spans multiple regions/continents with simultaneous theaters of combat, and
4. requires society-wide mobilization (industrial, military, and civilian) with system-shaping consequences for the global order.
As best as I can tell, only criteria number 3 has been met. Nothing is armed, nobody is actively fighting each other, and society has not been mobilized.Nothing is armed?
Society has not been mobilized?
I gave you a slew of links up above in one post regarding China ...I suggest you actually take the time to read them and watch the Military parade.
You can add this to the mix...
https://youtu.be/tnwgQzQ-vEg?si=mD-aUAnGB1wO2AnW
Willfully choosing to remain ignorant of reality doesn't actually change reality.
Understanding how China's global agendas compete with our own.
https://odi.org/en/about/our-work/globa … nitiative/ is about economic competition, not WW III
Disrupting the world’s money: China’s ambitions for global finance
https://odi.org/en/publications/chinas- … l-finance/ is about economic competition, not WW III
China's 30-year ROADMAP: Overtake USA and DOMINATE world with military 'built FOR WAR'
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/86 … -dominance is about a plan, not an imminent or on-going WW III
China military parade 2025 LIVE: Putin, Kim Jong Un attend as weapons on display
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aH6rGs-_Q4 is a larger version of Trump's parade, it is not WW III
China Aims for Total World Domination by 2050
https://www.energyandcapital.com/china- … n-by-2050/ duplicate
Three years of war in Ukraine: the Chinese-Russian alliance passes the test
https://www.osw.waw.pl/en/publikacje/os … asses-test The Ukraine war is not WW III
The BRICS summit in Rio shows that the group is more economically significant and politically present than ever before
https://www.ips-journal.eu/topics/econo … nger-8401/ is about economic competition, not WW III
BRICS and the Russia-Ukraine war: A global rebalance?
https://saiia.org.za/research/a-global-rebalance/ is about economic competition, not WW III
You put a lot of dots out there and you have somehow connected them to conclude we are in a shooting war with someone.
Those same dots tell me we need to do a better of job of competing with China.Yep... reminds me a little of ... "Peace for our time" ...a declaration made by British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in his 30 September 1938 remarks in London concerning the Munich Agreement.
Some of us see what is going on... such as China supplying and backing Russia and Iran as we fight Russia and Iran...
And others see 'Economic competition'...
Funny, in my almost 20-years of "running the halls of the Pentagon" myself, not once did I see an unbadged (meaning they weren't given permission to be there) reporter. If fact, I very rarely saw a reporter at all. So, it appears you are relying on false information in that regard.
Also, I have no idea what DoW is since it doesn't officially exist today. The Official acronym is DoD, the Department of Defense which was created by Congress (not EO) in 1947. It joined the Department of the Navy and the Department of the Army, aka, Department of War, and other agencies under one roof led by a Secretary of Defense. Trump's EO has no official weight.
As to your other sketchy points:
Security vs. transparency aren’t mutually exclusive. Requiring badges in a secure facility makes sense; but requiring escorts to non-classified areas and barring journalists from gathering even unclassified info would be a different—and pretty alarming—standard.
“Unclassified” ≠ “for public release.” The default in our system is that unclassified info is generally shareable unless it’s controlled (FOUO/CUI) or specifically restricted. If the rule says all unclassified material is off-limits without prior approval, that’s a major policy shift worth debating on its own terms—not as “press roaming the halls.”
Press access is about accountability, not running the Pentagon. Nobody thinks reporters “run” DoD. The question is whether the press can ask questions and verify facts without prior restraint. Guardrails are fine; prior restraint is not.
On the big claims (WWIII/“enemies within”). I get the strategic lens and the China/Russia/Iran concerns. But if we’re in a “war” so total that normal transparency norms don’t apply, that’s precisely when independent verification matters. Otherwise the public is flying blind.
WMDs lesson cuts both ways. That episode argues for more skeptical reporting, not less access.I must give props to you for that reply.
It appears a well thought out response after the "As to your other sketchy points".
When you are not openly denigrating and dismissing a person's post, and take the time to express your position, it can provide an argument worth reading.
DoW is the acronym for Department of War.
https://www.war.gov/
It is pure bullshyte to believe that the press access is a privilege. I will not abide with secret operations and cover ups associated with denying access. These people work for us and not the other way around. Conservatives have to be mindless to believe that this muzzling of press coverage has anything to do with national security. “National Security” a common theme used by tyrants to act outside and avoid public oversight.
This is an excuse and is completely unprecedented at least within this and over the last century of broadcast and print media. Tyrants and tyranny always are afraid of public scrutiny and oversight.
I call it as I see it.AI Overview:
During WWII, restrictions on military information included the censoring of news about troop movements, ship schedules, and military installations. The U.S. government established offices to create guidelines for voluntary censorship by media outlets, prohibiting sensitive topics and requiring official approval for release. These restrictions were intended to prevent information that could aid the enemy, and violations could lead to severe punishment.
END
You know better, we are in WWIII... when you accept that fact.... and it IS fact... you know the rules change regarding military information.“You know better, we are in WWIII... when you accept that fact.... and it IS fact... you know the rules change regarding military information.”
Yeah, i know better, alright. Ken, my bullshyte meter is on alert with the volume of an air raid siren. We are not formally at war, it has not been declared. I don’t know why you say we are? So, it is not a fact. SO, this is not WWII, so comparing pineapples with hand granades will not work. I thought Trump was supposed to keep us out of war, yet now we are at war?
“During World War II, the U.S. government did not dismiss the press entirely but instead implemented a system of censorship and propaganda. The Department of Defense did not exist during World War II; its precursor was the Department of War. The military, in cooperation with other federal agencies, worked to manage the flow of information to the public.”
That made sense under those circumstances, they are not akin to the present time.
———
Key facts about press relations during WWII:
The Office of Censorship was an independent federal agency created by President Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1941 to censor all communications in and out of the U.S.. It implemented a "Code of Wartime Practices" that asked the media to voluntarily withhold sensitive information, including details about troop movements, military plans, and new weapons.
The Office of War Information (OWI) was another agency established in 1942 to produce and coordinate pro-war propaganda through radio, films, and posters. It worked to ensure that media outlets promoted morale and public support for the war effort.
————-
We were OFFICIALLY at war, Ken, that is a big difference.
———
“Voluntary cooperation from the press was a cornerstone of the system. Journalists largely cooperated with the censorship codes, partly out of a sense of patriotism and the understanding that secrecy was necessary for national security. Accredited war correspondents also had to agree to military censorship of their dispatches from the front lines.”
There was no reason to change that policy except for tyrants and tyranny looking for safe places in “the basement” . When the only information available to the press as to what DOD is doing and how its spends public money come from an individual with every reason to conceal unethical or illelicit behavior then it is a “bridge too far”.
———
Military press camps were established to facilitate reporters' access to military units and battlefronts, though all content was subject to military and federal censorship.
Dismissal of the press did occur in limited, targeted ways. For instance, during the war, some newspapers lost mailing privileges or were otherwise restricted due to editorial positions that opposed government policy, particularly under the Espionage and Sedition Acts.
—————-
In times of war, all of these precautions are understandable and necessary
Even then the press was not dismissed or muzzled under far more justifiable circumstances.
All of what you say here amounts to a DEFCON 5 on my world renowned bullshyte meter.It doesn't matter if it is declared or not... we are in it... been in it ever since Biden got his chance to play War President and think he was going to defeat Russia in six months to a year.
We are in a global struggle primarily against the Russia - China alliance that the Biden Administration all but forced into being.
It is now a coalition of Russia, North Korea and Iran... with China behind the scenes supporting them all.
Choosing to be willfully ignorant of it doesn't change it... whether it is 'officially' declared or not doesn't change it.
How about when it becomes a fact? And why wasn't Hegseth fired for sharing all that secret information?
Just my view.
It’s true that the policy introduced by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, requiring journalists to sign an agreement before receiving Pentagon press credentials, has raised concerns. Still, I don’t see the idea itself as entirely new. For decades, journalists covering national security and defense have operated under certain access rules and restrictions, especially when entering secure facilities like the Pentagon. I remember that reporters embedded with military units during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars had to agree to limits on what they could report, often delaying or withholding information for security reasons. Access to restricted areas has always required escorts, prior clearance, and compliance with government protocols.
What makes this current rule different, in my view, is its broader scope. It now asks journalists not to obtain or report even unclassified information unless it has been formally approved for release. Those who refuse to sign may lose their Pentagon credentials or be denied access altogether. That goes beyond earlier practices, which mainly focused on classified or operationally sensitive material.
From what I’ve read in reports by Reuters, AP News, and The Washington Post, most major news organizations have refused to sign the new document, saying it could restrict press freedom. Only a few, such as One America News, have agreed. The Pentagon has said the goal is to protect national security and prevent unauthorized disclosures, not to limit reporting.
Personally, I think we’re living in a time when such a policy might actually serve our security needs better. We’ve all seen the damage caused by leaks and the chaos that can follow when sensitive or incomplete information is released too soon. So while this rule may be broader than in the past, it seems rooted in the same principle, finding a balance between a free press and the protection of national security.
And, times have drastically changed. This isn’t the same country we once lived in. The threats we face today, both from within and abroad, are far more complex and unpredictable. That reality alone makes it clear that the same old ways of handling information may no longer be enough to keep our nation secure.Keeping our nation secure? LOL
Pete Hegseth, the same guy who texted classified war plans to a reporter, wants to decide what the media can report at the Pentagon.
The First Amendment is clear: the government cannot stop a free press.
This order is unconstitutional and un-American.
For your consideration:
Thinking Through Protracted War with China
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/p … 1475-1.pdfThe key is the opening line "This report describes a set of scenarios as a foundation for future planning or analysis of a potential protracted war with China."
That doesn't read like we are in a hot WW III as you suggest we are.
Related Discussions
- 24
75th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack, Pentagon waste persists
by Credence2 8 years ago
Another reason that I distrust conservatives, (GOP) domestic spending is pinch penny, while they turn a blind eye to DOD wasting money like it grows on trees. Add this to their cover up and subsequent embarrassment, and I ask what makes THEM the sacred cow? As a progressive type, I consider THIS...
- 93
U.S. Plans to Murder American Citizens
by Rod Martin Jr 13 years ago
There have been numerous plans in American history for the government to murder American citizens for political gain.I seriously doubt that the Operation Northwoods document is the only tangible, direct evidence of such evil. That document lay hidden and classified for 35 years before it was...
- 99
Chinese Balloon Enters US Airspace
by Sharlee 2 years ago
After Chinese balloon enters US airspace, Biden secretary of state postpones trip to ChinaBlinken postpones trip to China after Republican lawmakers excoriated the Biden administration for appearing weak in response to suspected Chinese spy balloon.Not much to say, because our government has no...
- 143
That Pesky Constitutional Thingie (14th Amendment)
by Doug Hughes 14 years ago
The 14th AmendmentSection 4. "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall...
- 133
Loose Change WHAT IS WRONG WITH OUR COUNTRY AND OUR GOVERNMENT??/
by Julianna 16 years ago
"Cold War Baby" had written an article on this documentary and interesting enough there is an abundance of fact and truth to what happened post 09/11 , what is disgusting is that our government killed our own people. If you get the time please review the video as it is an 1:29 minutes...
- 56
Let this statement sink in for a moment:
by Kathleen Cochran 3 months ago
"President Trump threatened major broadcast networks in a string of social media posts late Sunday, suggesting they be fined or taken off the air over polling and coverage of his administration."Think this through."President Trump threatened major broadcast networks in a string of...