Round One Finds in the Pentagon FOI Document Dump

Kenneth Allard, a former NBC military analyst who has taught information warfare at the National Defense University, said the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. “This was a coherent, active policy,” he said.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html

The terms “publicity,” “propaganda,” and “publicity expert” have been interpreted to forbid a very limited number of activities. Congress has not defined the terms “publicity,” “propaganda,” and “publicity expert.” Thus, to GAO has gone the task of delineating what these terms encompass. GAO has done this on a caseby-case basis over the past half-century. Generally speaking, GAO has narrowly defined these terms. It has held that the “publicity or propaganda” prohibition in appropriations laws forbids any public relations activity that: {...} is “covert propaganda” (i.e., the communication does not reveal that
government appropriations were expended to produce it).

"Public Relations and Propaganda: Restrictions on Executive Agency Activities." Congressional Research Service.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32750.pdf

The failure of an agency to identify itself as the source of a prepackaged news story misleads the viewing public by encouraging the viewing audience to believe that the broadcasting news organization developed the information. The prepackaged news stories are purposefully designed to be indistinguishable from news segments broadcast to the public. When the television viewing public does not know that the stories they watched on television news programs about the government were in fact prepared by the government, the stories are, in this sense, no longer purely factual -- the essential fact of attribution is missing.
"B-304228, Department of Education--No Child Left Behind Act Video News Release and Media Analysis, September 30, 2005."
http://www.gao.gov/decisions/appro/304228.htm

A statutory prohibition on using appropriated funds for "publicity or propaganda" precluded undisclosed agency funding of advocacy by third-party groups. We stated that "covert attempts to mold opinion through the undisclosed use of third parties" would run afoul of restrictions on using appropriated funds for "propaganda."
White House Memorandum: Use of Government Funds for Video News Releases (re: Armstrong Williams)
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/fy2005/m05-10.pdf

"So the Pentagon would maintain a team of 'military analysts' who reliably 'carry their water' -- yet who were presented as independent analysts by the television and cable networks. By feeding only those pro-Government sources key information and giving them access -- even before responding to the press -- only those handpicked analysts would be valuable to the networks, and that, in turn, would ensure that only pro-Government sources were heard from.

"Meanwhile, the 'less reliably friendly' ones -- frozen out by the Pentagon -- would be 'weeded out' by the networks. The pro-Government military analysts would do what they were told because the Pentagon was 'their bread and butter.' These Pentagon-controlled analysts were used by the networks not only to comment on military matters -- and to do so almost always unchallenged -- but also even to shape and mold the networks' coverage choices.

"Even a casual review of the DoD's documents leaves no doubt that this is exactly how the program worked. The military analysts most commonly used by MSNBC, CNN, Fox, ABC, CBS and NBC routinely received instructions about what to say in their appearances from the Pentagon."

"How the military analyst program controlled news coverage: in the Pentagon's own words"
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/05/10/analysts/index.html

original source:
http://www.dod.mil/pubs/foi/milanalysts/23%20Apr%2008/Barstow%20Release%2023%20Apr%2008/7798%20-%207922.pdf

From; Lawrence, Dal/as, OASO-PA
S.nt: Tuesday, December 21, 2004 1:09PM I
To: Ruff. Eric, SES, OASD·PA
Subject: another request from military analyst I

Jed Babbin, on Scarborough tonight and Fox &. Friends tomorrow morning Topic: Defending SecDef/lntel Bill/Iraq Elections

Needed Info: "How will intel bill improve quality of intelligence gathering? Why is today's NYT definitely wrong with the attack against SecDef for his positions. Are there any UN election workers in Iraq today."

We know now that since April, American intelligence gatherers have missed some or all of the e-mails and telephone calls going overseas to suspect terrorists or coming into the US from them because of a classified decision of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act court. ed. note: this is a flat out lie, the administration admitted as much

Congress is scheduled to go out on its August recess tonight, and unless Democrats Russell Feingold (D-WI), Carl Levin (D-MI) and Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) suffer a moment of lucidity, the boys and girls will go off on their holiday without fixing FISA."
http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=7556

"Babbin gets really nasty and says on the air that Glenn has "no god damn idea what he’s talking about". Babbin tries to say that FISA "does not cover foreign intelligence gathering", which is funny since it is called the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Of course Babbin tries a typical neo-con tactic of yelling and screaming over someone when they are talking, but it fails.

Babbin tries to use the argument that he is a lawyer, but I have heard children give better arguments defending the actions of someone."
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/08/30/glenn-greenwald-discusses-fisa-on-the-alan-colmes-show/