SIGN IN to access Harper’s Magazine
Need to create a login? Want to change your email address or password? Forgot your password?
1. Sign in to Customer Care using your account number or postal address.
2. Select Email/Password Information.
3. Enter your new information and click on Save My Changes.
Subscribers can find additional help here. Not a subscriber? Subscribe today!
I’m on assignment, technically on break from blogging, but wanted to briefly comment on a post Wednesday by Noah Schactman at Danger Room. In it, Schactman said it took him “exactly 23 minutes to get Jason “Armchair Generalist” Sigger and Matt “Mountain Runner” Armstrong signed up” for the Pentagon’s blogger’s conference calls that I’ve been writing about. “And neither,” he adds, “is what you would call a fan of this administration.”
It’s great that Sigger and Armstrong will be joining in, because up until now, participants in the conference calls have been broadly sympathetic towards the Bush administration’s view of national security matters, and the conference calls have thus far served as a vehicle for the Pentagon to communicate with a largely friendly audience. But if the conference calls do in fact become a freewheeling forum, it would be contrary to the clearly defined original goals of the Pentagon public affairs office. As I’ve discussed in prior posts, the blogger calls are part of a broader program that is run largely by the administration’s political appointees. One of the memos I cited said the program would be “synchronize[d] . . . with the military and with policy.”
In focusing on the blogger calls I’ve unintentionally obscured components of the Pentagon’s program that are especially troubling: briefings for handpicked civilian defense and national security analysts, retired military officials, and others who are fed talking points and story lines that the administration wants to get out. Unlike with the blogger conference calls, there is apparently no public disclosure of who is taking part in those briefings and no transcripts of what transpires.
When the Pentagon opens up those components to public scrutiny, I’ll stop criticizing the program.
More from Ken Silverstein:
Commentary — November 17, 2015, 6:41 pm
The Clintons’ so-called charitable enterprise has served as a vehicle to launder money and to enrich family friends.
Estimated number of people who watched a live Webcast of a hair transplant last fall:
A rancher in Texas was developing a system that will permit hunters to kill animals by remote control via a website.
A man in Japan was arrested for stealing a prospective employer’s wallet during a job interview, and a court in Germany ruled that it is safe for a woman with breast implants to be a police officer.
Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!
"It is an interesting and somewhat macabre parlor game to play at a large gathering of one’s acquaintances: to speculate who in a showdown would go Nazi. By now, I think I know. I have gone through the experience many times—in Germany, in Austria, and in France. I have come to know the types: the born Nazis, the Nazis whom democracy itself has created, the certain-to-be fellow-travelers. And I also know those who never, under any conceivable circumstances, would become Nazis."