How Right-Wing Lie About MoveOn Ad Became The Story
Weekly Standard Lies About MoveOn Ad, Media Falls For It
Pay attention, America: this is how the right-wing uses the media to manipulate the truth and silence dissent against the Iraq war.
Even before MoveOn.org's ran its controversial ad about General Petraeus in the New York Times, The Weekly Standard published an article by Peter Hegseth, Executive Director of the organization Vets for Freedom. The headline of the article accused the MoveOn.org ad of calling Petreaus a 'traitor' ("MoveOn.org Calls Petraeus a Traitor"). The only problem: the word 'traitor' appears nowhere in the MoveOn.org ad nor anywhere on the MoveOn.org page about the ad. It is Hegseth's article that introduced the word 'traitor' into the story -- an outright lie intended to silence dissent against the war. Less than 24 hours after the Hegseth piece ran and the MoveOn.org ad appeared, the mainstream media picked up the Weekly Standard's lie and repeated it until it became the story.
The word 'betray' used by MoveOn in the ad implies many meanings, but does not directly imply 'traitor' -- unless that definition is introduced.
Voila! Another effort by U.S. citizens to question Bush's policy in Iraq has been silenced by right-wing, coordinated accusations that critics of the war seek to harm the country, this time by slandering the U.S. military.
And it is not just overt right-wing sources influenced by the Weekly Standard.
During an interview of MoveOn.org's Eli Pariser, last night (Sep 10, 2007), Hardball's Chris Matthew's repeated the false accusation several times, asking if it was acceptable to accuse Patraeus of being a 'traitor,' as if the MoveOn.org ad had done so -- thereby repeating Hegseth's false spin.
In the 48 hours since it was posted Hegseth's lie about the MoveOn.org ad has been repeated all over the media, from Hugh Hewitt in the Los Angeles Times (Sep 10, 2007) to lesser-known sources such as Wake Up America.
Hewitt also repeated the Hegseth lie in a Townhall.com post, posting a statement to the widely-read conservative blog that is outright false when he stated that the Senate had used "MoveOn.org as their party's attack dog to call David Petraeus a traitor"--despite the fact that the MoveOn.org ad did not call Petraeus a liar (full post here).
The problem, of course, is not just that a false statement in the original Hegseth article was published as if it was news on The Weekly Standard, but the uncritical way other media outlets picked up and repeated the lie.
To date, not one major media outlet has denounced the Hegseth pieces for lying about the text of the MoveOn.org ad.
(cross posted from Frameshop)
Follow Jeffrey Feldman on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JeffreyFeldman
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Why on earth should MoveOn offer any apology for this ad? Remember the GOP attack ads against Sen. Max Cleland? The ones where he was portrayed as being in league with Osama Bin Laden? Here's a courageous wounded veteran who served his country during Vietnam, and the GOP smeared him in the most despicable manner imaginable. Remember what George W. Bush's campaign did to John McCain in 2000? A former Vietnam Prisoner of War, and they perpetrated a smear campaign of whispers about his mental health, about his adopted daughter, and about his wife. Remember the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth, surrogates in depravity for the Republicon Party with the help of their lazy, pompous media minions who repeated these smear campaign tactics by continually covering the story so they didn't even have to run an ad.
All of them, the Republicon Party and every single media journalist who invokes it, should be shamed into silence by the simple repetition of three names whenever they bring up the MoveOn ad: "Max Cleland." "John McCain." "John Kerry."
All three of these VETERANS were despicably smeared by depraved right-wingers and their craven corporate press. General Petraeus is parroting the talking points given to him by this Republicon administration; moreover, his counter-insurgency military theory desperately needs to be a success, doesn't it? His credibility is ZERO, people. Flag Rank Generals are political animals, and Petraeus has proven to be an astute and ambitious politician for many years. He IS betraying us. MoveOn was entirely correct to use General Petraeus and Betray Us in the same ad. I applaud them for it.
Favorited! Well put and thank you!
Right on. Poor Wittle general. If he is that fragile he should be retired before he has to face some real adversity.
I agree with MoveOn.org that the testimony that General Petraeus is giving before congress is a betrayal of the troops under him who will die or be maimed in the next 2 or 3 FUs...
It is the same BS we were getting from Westmorland during the Vietnam war before 16,000 or so more troops were killed and countless wounded and maimed before we finally got out.
That said, the unfortunate result of the ad is that the Republicans are using the ad to bash Dems and skirt the real issues of our illegal and immoral involvement in Iraq.
But wait. this would be an example of the RW dealing in a lie. How could that happen?
The Moveon ad is a historical document showing that Petraeus is an agent for Bush's war. As the last General standing (Bush fired those who spoke the truth) Petraeus has betrayed his military colleagues, and the American people to support perpetual occupation and war.
Bingo.
Oooh! Abbie thinks he won a fuzzy bunny!
Does a Democrat, a Liberal, or someone on the left, ever, ever lie?
Just a question.
All the time. What has that got to do with this post?
Speaking for yourself, of course.
Ignore FairFlossie. He's nothing more than an ultra-right-wing troll.
PA Firefighter
No. Never have and never could and how dare you impugn the integrity of Americans many of whom are soldiers and officers.
Funny that no one in the media has made a big stink about the freedomswatch.org TV ads that use disabled vets and parents of dead soldiers to bolster the continuation of the war in Iraq, and their implications to the attacks on 9/11. I guess fostering lies works best on TV.
The moveon ad did not achieve the results that the authors were hoping for. It took me by surprise and I knew immediately that the backlash from the media would be the message of pundits scoring points for larger tv audiences.
So now all the talk is about why moveon would call an "American general", instead of facts about Betayus' past of self promotion coming from a secure place in the neocon philosophy.
In the end, I am more appalled at all the cowards at mediaco. Bowing down to their corporate masters for more war contracts.
So many cowards, traitors, so little time.
However we should ask why the degree of backlash to this relatively harmless chiding as compared to the lack of backlash when the right does something worse.
It is called duck and cover or OUCH the truth hurts so blame the other guy.
So now we're seeing complaints about a pre-emptive strike against an ad that hadn't run and which in turn was a pre-emptive strike against Congressional testimory that had yet to occur? Man, the news cycle is going into negative numbers!
Funny!
Actually, I thought the Moveon bit was crude and childish (which is pretty typical).
Now if you want to see actual treason in action you might want to peruse Kucinich's latest stunt in Syria. That little speach by any use of the word, falls under the treason catagory.
http://www.redstate.com/blogs/johninva/2007/sep/07/kucinich_insists_the_u_s_must_pay_reparations_to_iraq
Ah, just how is Mr. Kucinich's speech (that's two e's) in any way treasonous? I gotta hear this.
Know what "war crimes" means, babylonandon? Those are what you pay "reparations" for....
Thank you for pointing out Mr. Kucinich's provocative statement and labeling it treason. I guess when a man of peaceful intentions acknowledges that invasion, occupation and theft of a nation's resources in the name of "freedom" might just require US to make reparations, it opens him to receive several titles. Perhaps the addition of "compassionate" and "logical" to his "traitor" moniker might be in order. But then again, when you live in the land of "Super Power", compassion and logic are hardly viewed as admirable qualities. Maybe one day we can just tell the innocent Iraqi people "we are sorry for any inconvenience our greedy egos may have caused you" and then switch channels...the game is starting. GO TEAM!
I can't wait to see what he has to say when we call for the Bush cabal's trials at the Hague!
If the only thing the GOP has to whine about is one newspaper ad, using a GOP styled "Swift Boat" format...they are in far worse shape than is perceived.
One ad.
From one PAC.
...has them pooping themselves.
They've freaked out over one ad in one paper!
Many generals have been slammed in the media.
McArthur, Curtis Lemay (he even invented a new war crime!- firebombing of civilians), Westmoreland... the list is long. Ask U.S. Grant about bad ads.
Now if moveon.org ran a $50 Million TV saturation campaign, that would be different....but to use one ad to avoid any GOP discussion of the Iraq Report, is a clear sign.
The GOP is at peak implosion.
I agree, they really must be in bad shape to flame out over this. They must really be running scared from Moveon.org to waste time on something this trivial.
Look this was not any thing like a swift boat attack. the swift boater apparently made up or misstated specific details about Kerry's service. All that moveon did was make a play on words within an argument. NOT really very similar at all. People who were not paying attention might well believe Kerry had shot himself intentionally and lied about his own service to get a medal. I think there was no chance the pun would be mistaken as a substantive factual assertion. What the discussion becomes because you are all running with this nonsense is this and NOT for example about reconciling the General's op ed comment in 2004 with his current statements.
Colin Powell lied and ran.....what is he...
Go.....MoveOn.....Go.....Your the best we have....and the REPUKES fear you.....
The MoveOn! ad isn't worthy of all the criticism . . . except that it lost the opportunity to carry thru a more sophisticated attack on the Bush war machine and Petraeus is certtainly part of it.
Petraeus has lied for Bush in the past and he will lie now. Just as Colin Powell lied and other Bush officials about war and every other issue.
If Americans have to be woken up to the fact that Generals can and do lie, well, they're going to have to bear that shock and come to understand those facts.
In fact, it is treason. And most of us understand that about the Bush war machine and its corrupt supporters. But for those who don't believe anything unless they see it on TV, the fact that they don't know that is a problem for all of us.
Gradually these people are waking up --
But their long sleep has harmed America --
and the fact that they still rely on corporate-news for their "facts" also hurts America.
We might say, American media is "treason."
Ah, the beauty of sophistry and semantics!
You know as well as the whole country that MoveOn's motive and intent was to paint Patraeus as a traitor and liar. The word "betray" has only one clear meaning, and the media saw it.
MoveOn got snagged in their own crude attempt at swiftboating.
No, it was to paint Patraeus as a self serving sycophant who is putting his own personal political goals ahead of what is best for the US and it's Armed forces.
The whole country is seeing that now - just look at the polling data soon to be coming out.
-------------------------
And as far as only 'one' clear meaning - hogwash. There are many. All betrayers are not traitors - that is false logic.
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)be·tray /bɪˈtreɪ/ Pronunciation Key - [bi-trey] –verb (used with object) 1. to deliver or expose to an enemy by treachery or disloyalty: Benedict Arnold betrayed his country.
2. to be unfaithful in guarding, maintaining, or fulfilling: to betray a trust.
3. to disappoint the hopes or expectations of; be disloyal to: to betray one's friends.
4. to reveal or disclose in violation of confidence: to betray a secret.
5. to reveal unconsciously (something one would preferably conceal): Her nervousness betrays her insecurity.
6. to show or exhibit; reveal; disclose: an unfeeling remark that betrays his lack of concern.
7. to deceive, misguide, or corrupt: a young lawyer betrayed by political ambitions into irreparable folly.
8. to seduce and desert.
Tubby you need to understand the English language. No one said that he was a traitor. The implication was that Petraeus was politicizing and putting the administrations' interests above that of the American people whose interests he should be looking out for. I highly recommend taking your head out of the plastic bag.
The military can't participate in twisting the truth to serve a political agenda, and then cry foul when they face a backlash. I think the overiding principle in the U.S is that our system relies on a politically neutral military. When that has been violated as often as it has under Bush, expect a backlash.
It would seem that the military should foreswear political activites or face more charges of betrayal. I'm sending Move On more money, at least they're calling it like it is.
Hooray for Move On!
Tubby:
Explain why Betrayus is Petraeus' nickname at the Pentagon, ask them what they mean by it and then get back to us. I am sure we will then be interested in hearing what you have to say.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
