A New Propaganda Push From the War Profiteers

After the Deficit Committee, A New Propaganda Push From the War Profiteers

Since the deficit committee officially failed to produce a plan as of last week, expect the war profiteer spin to hit the fan. Here's an early warning of what to expect, courtesy of Reuters last week:

Failure of a special congressional committee to strike a deficit-reduction deal is expected to unleash desperate lobbying by U.S. arms makers to get lawmakers to block $600 billion in automatic cuts.

Their weapon of choice: jobs. But, don't expect the truth to get in the way of a good propaganda campaign.

The profiteer's agitprop push is already underway. Searching for "defense cuts" on Google early this morning already brings up articles high in the search feed from paid war-industry shills in the top results, notably a lengthy piece from Loren Thompson, perennial paid defender of massive military budgets (himself on the war industry dime). His argument, that Obama could lose the election due to job losses from military cuts, is one you better get used to seeing.

Among the kinds of spending examined, military spending actually costs jobs compared to any other form. It's the only spending that scored worse than basic consumer spending, and it created far less than half the jobs created by education spending. In short, at bare minimum, every billion dollars spent on the military costs at least 3,900 jobs compared to other spending types, and if compared to the best job creator from the study, education, $1 billion in military spending costs 15,500 jobs.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-gr ... 19177.html


Yep... Don't let truth get in the way of a good prop-up-the-military-industrial-complex/war-profiteer spin....

An editorial from the huff & puff, would you expect anything less?

Grady wrote: An editorial from the huff & puff, would you expect anything less?

Yes... I expect a lot less from Huffington Post.

Infrastructure spending, do it for the jobs...
Clean energy spending, do it for the jobs...
Defense spending, why not? And it might even save lives. The more drones you put in the air, the less you risk our troops. Or would LJ and the Huffington Post prefer to see more dead and wounded GI's?

No... I would prefer to see less money spent on unnecessary defense toys...particularly when it's shown that the money spent has no correlation to saving those hypothetical lives.

I don't know,,, I still am in the favor of Peace Through Superior Fire Power.

Great subject LJ

Keep up the great work...You do make a difference..They only pretend that they don't respect you or your opinion. All the irritated responses prove otherwise :hands:

They know you'll never change their minds, they got those in a lockbox but they fear you'll change others..

Martin Ent Inc wrote: I don't know,,, I still am in the favor of Peace Through Superior Fire Power.

We had that 30 years ago...We have enough air craft carriers now.


Now they are just looting the treasury in the name of defense and they do it by keeping people like you scared...Whata scared of my friend!?

Whaaat?

Vice Lord wrote:

Martin Ent Inc wrote: I don't know,,, I still am in the favor of Peace Through Superior Fire Power.

We had that 30 years ago...We have enough air craft carriers now.


Now they are just looting the treasury in the name of defense and they do it by keeping people like you scared...Whata scared of my friend!?

Whaaat?

Nutin' honey cause I got Superior Firepower. :woo hoo:

Yeah..Thats what i'm sayin..We can blow up the world 200 times over, we got the planet secured..

We don't need anymore weapons..