It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Lincoln Group - Source of Fake Iraqi News

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 1 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   
The White House wants an investigation
Yeah right


Basically at the end of this investigation, the White House and Pentagon will be cleared and the Lincoln Group will be the source and owner of all the blame.

The story:

Probe Sought Into Stories Planted in Iraqi Media


WASHINGTON -- The White House said today it has demanded information from the Pentagon about a secret U.S. military offensive to plant stories in the Iraqi media, and senators are planning to meet privately Friday to hear details about the information operations campaign underway in Iraq.

White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the White House was "very concerned" about reports that a defense contractor in Iraq, working with U.S. troops, was paying newspapers in Baghdad to run positive stories written by U.S. soldiers.

"We are seeking more information from the Pentagon," McClellan told reporters.

Pentagon officials said they were scrambling to get information from commanders in Baghdad about the arrangement between the U.S. military and Lincoln Group, a Washington-based contractor that specializes in "strategic communications" in combat zones.

***
Since early this year, the Information Operations Task Force in Baghdad has used Lincoln Group to plant stories in the Iraqi media that trumpet the successes of U.S. and Iraqi troops against insurgents, U.S.-led efforts to rebuild Iraq, and rising anti-insurgent sentiment among the Iraqi people, according to senior military officials and documents obtained by The Times.

Information operations troops write news stories, called "storyboards," and deliver them to the Iraqi staff of Lincoln Group. After that, Lincoln Group staffers translate the storyboards into Arabic and pay newspaper editors in Baghdad to run the stories.
****


Now why would we need to lie? And why would American soldiers need to write the Iraqi news?

Let's just say the White House is free and clear from any of this, and the Pentagon places blame solely on the Lincoln Group..saying they acted alone...what then? Will they write retractions and offer explanations to the Iraqi media and the Iraqi people?

Why is it that I feel this story is going to just dissappear with no consequences for the perpretrators of media fraud and disinformation? How far is this investigation really going to go?

btw here is the website for the Lincoln Group, I believe they will take all the heat for this.
www.lincolngroup.com...

The front page says it all for me.

Related News Link:
White House 'Concerned' About Paid Stories

U.S. admits planting pro-American stories in Iraq

[edit on 12-2-2005 by worldwatcher]




posted on Dec, 1 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
btw here is the website for the Lincoln Group, I believe they will take all the heat for this.


And they will be rewarded handsomely for taking that heat!


This is starting to be the administration of the Fall Guy! They can do anything they want as long as they have someone lined up to take the heat.

What else would be their advantage of making good news?

Here's the original story on ATSNN
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Dec, 1 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
thanks for including the link to the ATSNN story, I forgot to add it in.


Maybe I'll change the title...to better reflect my thoughts on this...I was trying to be sarcastic, but I guess that isn't coming across in just the title.

You're very correct BH in calling this the administration of the Fall Guy.

The Lincoln Group will take the heat, but nothing really is going to be changed or done about what has taken place. The current brainwashing will continue and another blind eye will be turned.

btw..more on the shady Lincoln Group:

The Lincoln Group, which received a $5 million contract in 2004 and a contract worth up $100 million in 2005.


What's Lincoln Group?



[edit on 12-1-2005 by worldwatcher]



posted on Dec, 1 2005 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Is there anything wrong with providing positie news that will help stabalize Iraq instead of negative news that may provoke more carnage?

As long as the stories themselves aren't fiction, I don't see a problem with it.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Is there anything wrong with providing positie news that will help stabalize Iraq instead of negative news that may provoke more carnage?


Telling only part of the truth is a classic way to present a false story or lie. Please read the following ‘article’ about our mystery guest:



This man is a Christian (Baptist)

During his presidency, the U.S. enjoyed more peace and economic well being than at any time in its history.
...
He could point to:
- the lowest unemployment rate in modern times
- the lowest inflation in 30 years
- the highest home ownership in the country's history
- dropping crime rates in many places
- reduced welfare roles

He proposed the first balanced budget in decades and achieved a budget surplus. He called for a great national initiative to end racial discrimination.

He sought legislation to upgrade education, to protect jobs of parents who must care for sick children, and to strengthen environmental rules.

He excelled as a student. As a delegate to Boys Nation while in high school, he met President John Kennedy in the White House Rose Garden. The encounter led him to enter a life of public service.

He graduated from Georgetown University and in 1968 won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford University. He received a law degree from Yale University in 1973, and entered politics in Arkansas.

He drew huge crowds when he traveled through South America, Europe, Russia, Africa, and China, advocating U.S. style freedom.


S ource

Now, all of that is true and it paints a certain picture of Bill Clinton. Is it the truth? Every bit. Is there anything wrong with this story? I guess it's a personal judgment, but I say yes, there's something very wrong as it's only half of the story. And I'm sure you know the details of the other half quite well.

You might say that there's a good reason for lying to Iraq, though, so that makes it ok. Well, I don't agree. I was taught that lying is wrong. I believe that lying, regardless of the reason, is simply morally wrong. Presenting only part of the picture (especially with the intent of deceiving) is something I judge as morally wrong.

Unfaithful women could withhold the truth from their husband to keep peace and not cause 'carnage'. Is that ok? Our government could only tell us part of the story about aliens because they think we can't handle the truth. We might riot in the streets. Is that ok? Where do you draw the line that it's ok to tell only part of the truth and present a picture that is a lie?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:22 AM
link   
Well with respect whats wrong with writing half the story?
The present media do it quite well....they ommit facts and simply point out parts that will encourage the reader or change the readers mind on something.

Rarely will you find 2 news reports giving off the same immage and if they do you can expect politics to share some part of it...



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:31 AM
link   
There is something wrong with creating fake positive news in Iraq. And what the Lincoln Group does there is much more than put out fake media. They are they to decieve you, me, the Iraqi's and the rest of the world.

The fundamental principle behind the media should always be truth and facts. By creating news stories with a positive spin, a false sense of hope and security is being instilled in a place where there is none. Fake news does not only trick the Iraqi people, it also tricks the American population.

The Lincoln Group is a shady, clandestine corporation that makes deception their business.
www.sourcewatch.org...
They create, sell and force propaganda. Americans should be extremely concerned that these types of practice are being paid for by our government. If it can be used in other countries around the world what makes you think it isn't being used right here. Actually there is proof regarding this administration being in bed with the media, but yet some of you refuse to see and accept that this is wrong on so many levels of what a society should be based on.

It should be said, that Americans who cannot accept that mass scaled deception to a population as being an unacceptable practice in a democracy, do not have the capacity to understand what it would be like to live in the shoes of those being fooled, yet they should know the best, since they are the examples that the deception does work.

But back to the Lincoln Group and their responsibility. While they did commit these acts and actually did the deed, it was the Pentagon who hired them to do so. The Pentagon which reports to the White House
So all this "investigation" is really for what? Why investigate what we already know? We already know how it will turn out.

[edit on 12-2-2005 by worldwatcher]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Well with respect whats wrong with writing half the story?
The present media do it quite well....


Yes, they do it well. But is it the right thing to do? Do you sanction it or criticize it? Is it right for the government, any government, to pay the media to write only the favorable part of the story and leave out the negative, especially with the intent to deceive?

(with respect...
)



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   
Nice questions, with much respect...


Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Yes, they do it well. But is it the right thing to do?

Too many see that as ok, I dont.



Do you sanction it or criticize it?

Criticize it to the max.


Is it right for the government, any government, to pay the media to write only the favorable part of the story and leave out the negative, especially with the intent to deceive?

(with respect...
)

Well yes and no, if they people care about themselves they will look up what is being said and know the full story.
Those who dont well....are mindless sheep.




[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
Well yes and no, if they people care about themselves they will look up what is being said and know the full story.
Those who dont well....are mindless sheep.
[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]


What about people who don't have internet access or alternative forms of information. What if the local newspapers are their only source of news?
While some in Iraq may have internet and satellite tv...the majority doesn't...and not only that, power outages in Iraq are common and frequent in the country.

A very interesting read

It's propaganda (shock, horror)!

Lies I tell you, all of it just lies, we're all living a lie!!!! ahhhh!!!
(I feel better now that I have screamed)

[edit on 12-2-2005 by worldwatcher]



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Now, all of that is true and it paints a certain picture of Bill Clinton. Is it the truth? Every bit. Is there anything wrong with this story? I guess it's a personal judgment, but I say yes, there's something very wrong as it's only half of the story. And I'm sure you know the details of the other half quite well.

You might say that there's a good reason for lying to Iraq, though, so that makes it ok. Well, I don't agree. I was taught that lying is wrong. I believe that lying, regardless of the reason, is simply morally wrong. Presenting only part of the picture (especially with the intent of deceiving) is something I judge as morally wrong.

Unfaithful women could withhold the truth from their husband to keep peace and not cause 'carnage'. Is that ok? Our government could only tell us part of the story about aliens because they think we can't handle the truth. We might riot in the streets. Is that ok? Where do you draw the line that it's ok to tell only part of the truth and present a picture that is a lie?


I actually agree. I am a big fan of the "whole" truth. But it sems to me that most of the time, the "news" only reports the bad things in Iraq. We get real time updates of any deaths, but do we get real time updates of new hospitols, schools, and buisnesses opening? Or real time news on victories of our armed forces? No, we do not.

What I would like to see is a balance. I know a lot of guys that have served over there, and to a man they see the coverage of the war as completely negative, when in thier own actual years of experience it is actually a positive thing that is going on, with small negative set backs.

That is the problem I have. How can anyone have a realistic view of whats going on over there if all we are told is the negatives? No wonder some people mitakenly think we are losing.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
But it sems to me that most of the time, the "news" only reports the bad things in Iraq. We get real time updates of any deaths, but do we get real time updates of new hospitols, schools, and buisnesses opening? Or real time news on victories of our armed forces? No, we do not.


Yes, we do. Soldiers die every day. Hospitals do not get built every day. Believe me, I know there's positive news about Iraq because every time I hear "Another victory in Iraq today", my stomach turns. Not because there are good things happening there, but because I don't consider any 'victory' we experience worth all the death and destruction there, but that's another matter.



What I would like to see is a balance.


I bet you do, more than you realize, anyway, you're just not noticing it. We notice the things we DON'T want to hear. You hear "victory in Iraq" and because you support the war (I assume), it doesn't have a big impact on you. But when you hear the negative stuff, you are impacted because to you, that's just another thing we (lefties) have to crab about.

See, to me, the news coverage seems biased the other way, like everything is going well in Iraq, or at least as well as can be expected, considering it's a war. Only recently has there been real condemnation of the war and that's because it's just getting worse over there.



How can anyone have a realistic view of whats going on over there if all we are told is the negatives?


We can't. Not by listening to the news on TV. I can't and you can't. I think it's a disaster and you think we're winning. Neither of us knows for sure.



No wonder some people mitakenly think we are losing.


What makes you think you're getting a clear picture and that you know the truth? I'm not sure why you hang onto the idea that we're 'winning'. You don't know any better than anyone else. But it's our job to make sure we are as educated and informed as possible.

We're obviously going to disagree about what's going on over there because we're each seeing what we want to see, and as I've heard, the truth is usually somewhere in between.



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcher
What about people who don't have internet access or alternative forms of information. What if the local newspapers are their only source of news?
While some in Iraq may have internet and satellite tv...the majority doesn't...and not only that, power outages in Iraq are common and frequent in the country.

You dont need a sat conection or acess to the net to look about, now come on...
You catn SERIOSLY be trying to tell me that you cant find out what happened UNLESS it comes from a newspaper or website?



Lies I tell you, all of it just lies, we're all living a lie!!!! ahhhh!!!
(I feel better now that I have screamed)

[edit on 12-2-2005 by worldwatcher]
What is the lie?
Your life?Or mines?



posted on Dec, 2 2005 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Propoganda is just as much a part of war as bullets and tanks. This isnt the first time this has happened(by the that I mean a propoganda war). If the inusrgents are going to do this, why shouldnt the military start their own campaign. Its how its been done since the beginning of warfare. I agree with mad man, as long as the news isnt BS, I see no problem with it. All is fair in love and war. I'm starting to wonder if the US military can keep anything on the DL anymore.

[edit on 12/2/2005 by ludaChris]



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:08 PM
link   
More on the Lincoln Group and the Pysops

Employees: U.S. guided pay-for-play


WASHINGTON -- U.S. military officials in Iraq were fully aware that a Pentagon contractor regularly paid Iraqi newspapers to publish positive stories about the war and made clear that none of the stories should be traced to the United States, according to several current and former employees of Lincoln Group, the Washington-based contractor.

In contrast with assertions by military officials in Baghdad and Washington, interviews and Lincoln Group documents show that the information campaign waged over the past year was designed to cloak any connection to the U.S. military.

"In clandestine parlance, Lincoln Group was a `cut-out'--a third party--that would provide the military with plausible deniability," said a former Lincoln Group employee who worked on the operation. "To attribute products to [the military] would defeat the entire purpose."


from the same article


According to Lincoln Group documents, the company reported to the Army that more than $16 million was spent on advertisements on Iraqi television over two months.


I don't care if you feel propaganda on our part is necessary or right or not, but what I do care about is the spending of so much tax payer dollars on this cause. $16 MILLION!!! over 2 months on ads, UMMMMM I think we could have won alot more Iraqis hearts and minds if we had used the $16 million, to restore more infrastructure, build more schools and hospitals and maybe even pay the Iraqi police and military more money.. I mean give them something they need and want instead of feeding them baloney.



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:28 PM
link   
I really don't see the problem here, as long as the stories were true then what’s the problem with reporting them? Are positive news from Iraq frowned upon nowadays? The anti war crowd has Al Jazeeraand basically most of the major news corporations reporting only negative stories form Iraq. The military can’t publish positive news? What's the matter don't like news that doesn't fit your agenda?

I don't know why the military made this secret, it is not illegal, and its damn good idea. There should be a balance in the news that is reported.



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:31 PM
link   
How about having the Iraqis write their own good news as they determine it, why should we be the one to decide what good news is and what should be pushed on them? And how can anyone justify that fake news is worth 16 million dollars...I can of at least 100 ways in which that money could have been used in Iraq to positively change the iraqi opinion of us and the war without creating or pushing stories.



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:33 PM
link   
when words are twisted from "paying to print good stories" to "payed off to create and print fake news" you know theres an intentional bias or people just cant comprehend simple sentences.

whats wrong with paying to print truthful articles? what, if its pro-american its somehow different than what they get paid to print any other day which is true? if theres constant anti-american news why cant there be pro-american stuff to counter it?

[edit on 19-12-2005 by namehere]



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by worldwatcherI can of at least 100 ways in which that money could have been used in Iraq to positively change the iraqi opinion of us and the war without creating or pushing stories.

when noone reports it how is that possible?
theyre just bringing attention to what everyone ignores or refuse to report.



posted on Dec, 19 2005 @ 09:40 PM
link   
Perhaps you need to read up more on this but this isn't just a case of "paying to print good stories", this is fake news. The stories all had to those certain key words like "freedom in adversity" "heroic ...." any story can be given a spin or made to be shown in certain light, but by paying our soldiers to write this, which I doubt that all if many can actually be confirmed as real and factual is a fraud and a shame. But I guess it's fine since it's okay to fool Americans on daily basis, so why fool the Iraqis too.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join