Thursday, April 09, 2009
Obama's Potemkin military reception, NO SCANDAL; Troops plan who will take what questions from Bush, HUGE SCANDAL
"Cheered wildly by U.S. troops," begins Jennifer Democratic Operative Loven's AP report on Obama's surprise visit to Iraq on Tuesday.
Quite a contrast to the silent treatment Marines gave Obama at his Camp LeJeune speech in late February. Just how did Obama manage to fix that little problem?
According to a sergeant in Iraq:
Charles Dharapak/associated press
So will the press cover this evidence of a staged and unrepresentative show of military affection for our anti-military president? The reporters were there. Did they actually see the troops being sorted by whether they voted for Obama, which the sergeant describes as happening on the spot?
Stephen Hurst's AP report is upfront about Obama's fervent desire for a hero's welcome:
FLASHBACK: How the press treated the merest impression of a staged troop response under President Bush, even when there was no actual manipulation
Remember this headline from 2005:
Now there is evidence that Obama perpetrated an actual fraud right under the watching eyes of the press, handpicking Obama voters to represent on television the views of our soldiers, and the press reports nothing but the fraudulent story.
Piling it on
Of course the AP stories about Obama's surprise Iraq trip are larded with other bits of pro-Obama, anti-Bush disinformation as well. Hurst ends with his own interpretation of the glorious new age of Obama:
Neither did the press note the glaring counterfactuals in Obama's speech. From The New York Times:
All the disinformation that fits in print.
Quite a contrast to the silent treatment Marines gave Obama at his Camp LeJeune speech in late February. Just how did Obama manage to fix that little problem?
According to a sergeant in Iraq:
We were pre-screened, asked by officials “Who voted for Obama?”, and then those who raised their hands were shuffled to the front of the receiving line. They even handed out digital cameras and asked them to hold them up. [Via Macsmind.]As supporting evidence for the digital-cameras part of the story, the sergeant (or Mac, can't tell which), suggests that the identical cameras can be verified in the AP photos. Looks right:
Charles Dharapak/associated press
So will the press cover this evidence of a staged and unrepresentative show of military affection for our anti-military president? The reporters were there. Did they actually see the troops being sorted by whether they voted for Obama, which the sergeant describes as happening on the spot?
Stephen Hurst's AP report is upfront about Obama's fervent desire for a hero's welcome:
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama went for the defining television shot by capping his first extended foreign tour with a surprise visit to Iraq.Just no mention of HOW Obama managed to fake this response: Obama lover's to the front!
He got it – pictures of hundreds of U.S. troops cheering wildly as he told them it was time for the Iraqis to take charge of their own future.
FLASHBACK: How the press treated the merest impression of a staged troop response under President Bush, even when there was no actual manipulation
Remember this headline from 2005:
Bush Teleconference With Soldiers StagedIt dominated the headlines and the television news-analysis for days, and the fabricated scandal was utterly dishonest. The so-called "staging" involved no manipulation whatsoever. A group of soldiers who were scheduled for a televised chat with President Bush were "caught on tape" discussing ahead of time who would answer questions on what subjects. There was NO discussion of WHAT should be said.
Now there is evidence that Obama perpetrated an actual fraud right under the watching eyes of the press, handpicking Obama voters to represent on television the views of our soldiers, and the press reports nothing but the fraudulent story.
Piling it on
Of course the AP stories about Obama's surprise Iraq trip are larded with other bits of pro-Obama, anti-Bush disinformation as well. Hurst ends with his own interpretation of the glorious new age of Obama:
The world has been alerted to a new U.S. approach that breaks with the "go it alone" style of Bush."Go it alone" as in going into Iraq with a coalition of 40 countries and an evenly split minority party (same degree of Democrat support in the Senate as opposition in the House).
Neither did the press note the glaring counterfactuals in Obama's speech. From The New York Times:
The president said that it was time for Iraqis “to take responsibility for their country and for their sovereignty.”So why does it take Gateway Pundit to point out that sovereignty has already been transferred in 13 of 18 provinces?
All the disinformation that fits in print.
Comments:
<< Home
I am so sick and tired of all this disinformation! Isn't there a way we can get some of this "caught on tape" somehow? Ah...even if we did, there are still so many people that are just TOO BLIND to see. I just can't imagine it, but it's true. We 'll just have to continue praying, fighting to get the truth out, and fighting to TAKE AMERICA BACK!
Shame on Jennifer Levin! She saw Obama/Soetoro wait until the Pledge of Allegiance was said and the National Anthem was sung, before he made his "grand entrance." He didn't want to have to salute the flag or pretend allegiance to the United States--and it DIDN'T go unnoticed! The YouTube tape shows that a handful of people clapped weakly upon his entrance--I've NEVER seen ANYTHING like it. The only time they REALLY clapped when we he told them he'd raise their pay--so he has to BUY their favor, just like he BOUGHT the election...what a man, huh? NOT!!!
His underhandedness DISGUSTS me! Our Country deserves a REAL man (or woman), with integrity at the helm! The time for complacency and satisfaction with our Government has come to an END. We must ACT NOW, or our chance will be lost and our rights will have been stripped away FOR GOOD.
God bless you and GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Cynde
http://usurper-exposed.blogspot.com/
Shame on Jennifer Levin! She saw Obama/Soetoro wait until the Pledge of Allegiance was said and the National Anthem was sung, before he made his "grand entrance." He didn't want to have to salute the flag or pretend allegiance to the United States--and it DIDN'T go unnoticed! The YouTube tape shows that a handful of people clapped weakly upon his entrance--I've NEVER seen ANYTHING like it. The only time they REALLY clapped when we he told them he'd raise their pay--so he has to BUY their favor, just like he BOUGHT the election...what a man, huh? NOT!!!
His underhandedness DISGUSTS me! Our Country deserves a REAL man (or woman), with integrity at the helm! The time for complacency and satisfaction with our Government has come to an END. We must ACT NOW, or our chance will be lost and our rights will have been stripped away FOR GOOD.
God bless you and GOD BLESS AMERICA!
Cynde
http://usurper-exposed.blogspot.com/
Aside from the fact that the cameras in the pic you cut and pasted are pretty obviously NOT identical, it seems you might have spent a few seconds Googling for other pictures just to make sure. For instance:
More pix, same event
Another wingnut meme bites the dust.
More pix, same event
Another wingnut meme bites the dust.
# posted by 
: 12:37 AM
: 12:37 AM
Actually, I Googled pretty thoroughly. Image search Obama+Iraq+visit+troops and you won't find the two that Zuzu links to in his Digg comment that show a variety of cameras (the CTV.ca picture and the whitehouse.gov picture #6). You WILL find some very interesting pics of soldiers showing a marked lack of enthusiasm to The One. There is the photo from this story of troops failing to applaud Obama's visit to a Hawaiian mess hall over Christmas, and this picture of an underwhelming mess hall visit during Obama's earlier trip to Iraq (July 2008).
So apparently there are a couple of pictures that show troops with a variety of cameras at the recent photo-op, in addition to the pictures that seem to show 15 or so identical cameras. Good to know.
The presence of non-identical cameras in some pictures does not in any way undercut the purported statement from the sergeant that identical cameras were handed out, and the clumping of identical cameras in some pictures still supports that claim. Maybe the "officials" handed out a bunch of cameras to the front of the receiving line then ran out.
In any case, identical cameras is only the slightest part of the story, just a bit of evidence, as I describe it above. The more important indirect evidence is the implausible complete reversal from the distinctly cool response Obama received from the troops on previous occasions. Most important, of course, is the direct evidence: the statement that MacRanger says he got from a sergeant in Iraq, declaring that soldiers were sorted by whether they voted for Obama.
Obviously this information needs corroboration. All we have is MacRanger’s word that the original email came from a sergeant in Iraq. I asked Mac if he could get back in touch with the sergeant to find out if there are others who can back his account. (No answer yet.) I also sent a request for confirmation to CENTCOM last Saturday. They were forthcoming back in 2004 with the Jamil Hussein story (broken by Curt at Flopping Aces).
No response from CENTCOM yet either. If anybody else wants to ask, here is their contact page, with phone numbers and email addresses. I emailed their Iraq desk: (CPICPRESSDESK@Iraq.centcom.mil).
Post a Comment
So apparently there are a couple of pictures that show troops with a variety of cameras at the recent photo-op, in addition to the pictures that seem to show 15 or so identical cameras. Good to know.
The presence of non-identical cameras in some pictures does not in any way undercut the purported statement from the sergeant that identical cameras were handed out, and the clumping of identical cameras in some pictures still supports that claim. Maybe the "officials" handed out a bunch of cameras to the front of the receiving line then ran out.
In any case, identical cameras is only the slightest part of the story, just a bit of evidence, as I describe it above. The more important indirect evidence is the implausible complete reversal from the distinctly cool response Obama received from the troops on previous occasions. Most important, of course, is the direct evidence: the statement that MacRanger says he got from a sergeant in Iraq, declaring that soldiers were sorted by whether they voted for Obama.
Obviously this information needs corroboration. All we have is MacRanger’s word that the original email came from a sergeant in Iraq. I asked Mac if he could get back in touch with the sergeant to find out if there are others who can back his account. (No answer yet.) I also sent a request for confirmation to CENTCOM last Saturday. They were forthcoming back in 2004 with the Jamil Hussein story (broken by Curt at Flopping Aces).
No response from CENTCOM yet either. If anybody else wants to ask, here is their contact page, with phone numbers and email addresses. I emailed their Iraq desk: (CPICPRESSDESK@Iraq.centcom.mil).
<< Home
