A Marine's Letter From Iraq Serves as a Scathing Indictment of the Media

[Richard G]

Letter can be read here:

http://chronwatch.com/editorial/contentDisplay.asp?aid=4447

[ArmchairPhysicist]

I can't put my finger on it, but something about that letter just screams "Not written by a Marine". Perhaps the message is accurate, but the story about where the letter comes from is bullshiznit.

[crackmonkey]

Why do you say that? There are many similar letters from troops in Iraq on Andrew Sullivan's site. He has posted a number of letters from troops since the beginning of the conflict.

http://www.andrewsullivan.com/

[The Fool]

Originally posted by ArmchairPhysicist
I can't put my finger on it, but something about that letter just screams "Not written by a Marine". Perhaps the message is accurate, but the story about where the letter comes from is bullshiznit.

It reeks of Journalese.... But hey, If you want to make a point why not claim your essay is a "letter from the front".

This "the media are reporting it wrong" has been around for a while. Oh well, If they are getting it wrong, it appears they are all getting it wrong at the same time....

[Segnosaur]

Snopes (whom I believe is an unbiased source) as an example of a 'letter from the front' on their site too:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/rydbom.asp


The news you watch on TV is exaggerated, sensationalized and selective. Good news doesn't sell.

The stuff you don't hear about on CNN?

... there are now 3200 megawatts (Mw) of power being produced daily,

... LPG, what all Iraqis use to cook and heat with, is at 103 percent of normal production and we, the U.S. Army, are ensuring it is being distributed fairly to all Iraqis. You have to remember that only three months ago, all these things were used by the Saddam regime as weapons against the population to keep them in line.

... Lastly, all of you please realize that 90 percent of the damage you see on TV was caused by Iraqis, not by us and not by the war.

... I'm living in a "guest palace" on a 500-acre palace compound with 20 palaces with like facilities built in half a dozen towns all over Iraq that were built for one man. Drive down the street and out into the countryside five miles away like I have and see all the families of 10 or more, all living in mud huts and herding the two dozen sheep on which their very existence depends ..then tell me why you think we are here.

[a_unique_person]

Was the that 'indictment' or did you mean to say 'instrument'?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Segnosaur
Snopes (whom I believe is an unbiased source) as an example of a 'letter from the front' on their site too:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/rydbom.asp




'Unbiased'? Now that's a laugh. They serve their purpose, but they do have a purpose.

[swellman]

Originally posted by a_unique_person



'Unbiased'? Now that's a laugh. They serve their purpose, but they do have a purpose.

Could you expand on your comment? I can't tell if you're saying all people have a natural bias or snopes is a tool of someone.

[a_unique_person]

All people have some sort of bias, including Snopes. I look at them occasionally, but they do have a political bent that shapes their world view. I hardly think they are a source of deliberate misinformation, just that I take their views, like all information, with a grain of salt.

In the case of politics, I think they are definitely leaning to the right, but by no means extremist in their views.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
In the case of politics, I think they are definitely leaning to the right, but by no means extremist in their views.

Sorry...I just had to snicker when I saw that. Barbara and David are left-liberals.

(I used to be on a listserv with David; haven't talked to him for a couple years, but I don't think that's changed.)

[a_unique_person]

Left-Liberal in the US means different things to people in other places around the world.

[Cleon]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Left-Liberal in the US means different things to people in other places around the world.

True enough. Hell, in some places DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) would be considered right-of-center. :)

Of course, that goes for "right-conservative," too. Even Newt Gingrich is no match for Jorg Haider in the right-wing department.

[swellman]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
All people have some sort of bias, including Snopes. I look at them occasionally, but they do have a political bent that shapes their world view. I hardly think they are a source of deliberate misinformation, just that I take their views, like all information, with a grain of salt.

In the case of politics, I think they are definitely leaning to the right, but by no means extremist in their views.

Thanks for the clarification.

I have always considered Snopes as a watered down folklorist site, not really a political one.

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Richard G
Letter can be read here:

http://chronwatch.com/editorial/contentDisplay.asp?aid=4447

The editors note should tell one plenty about the content of the letter before it is even read.

(Editors Note: This letter is written by a Marine in Iraq. It is submitted by Carl Sundstrom, San Diego, California, Retired Captain U.S. Naval Intelligence).

One should expect that a positive letter would be submitted by a military officer who has fully identified himself.

[Tmy]

Just a couple weeks ago we had a thread about a negative letter from a soilder. . If I remember right people called him a traitor and said he didnt know what he was talking about. That guy had the balls to sign his name. ( there should be a follow up story on what happened to him.)

[Crossbow]

Originally posted by Tmy
Just a couple weeks ago we had a thread about a negative letter from a soilder. . If I remember right people called him a traitor and said he didnt know what he was talking about. That guy had the balls to sign his name. ( there should be a follow up story on what happened to him.)

Yes, but that letter was from an enlisted soldier as opposed to an officer.

[peptoabysmal]

I don't know. A letter from the front just doesn't look authentic to me unless it has holes punched through it where you might have mentioned a location, a person, an animal, a breadbox. You learned real quick to write on one side of the paper and don't use any foreign language words and don't talk about any anecdotes from the past (which might be interpreted as a coded message!).

[P.S.A.]

I recommend you all do a web search for "Republican Astroturf" and "GOP Team Leader Points" to introduce yourselves to the current state of US politics, especially with regard to how the US media covers it. I'm sure the Democratic party does the same too, but regarding this particular issue, there has been a definate concerted effort to fool newspapers into printing fake 'letters from Iraq on the behalf of Republican/Pro-War supporters;

"WASHINGTON -- Letters from hometown soldiers describing their successes rebuilding Iraq have been appearing in newspapers across the country as U.S. public opinion on the mission sours.
And all the letters are the same.

A Gannett News Service search found identical letters from different soldiers with the 2nd Battalion of the 503rd Airborne Infantry Regiment, also known as "The Rock," in 11 newspapers, including Snohomish, Wash.

The Olympian received two identical letters signed by different hometown soldiers: Spc. Joshua Ackler and Spc. Alex Marois, who is now a sergeant. The paper declined to run either because of a policy not to publish form letters.

The five-paragraph letter talks about the soldiers' efforts to re-establish police and fire departments, and build water and sewer plants in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, where the unit is based.

"The quality of life and security for the citizens has been largely restored, and we are a large part of why that has happened," the letter reads.

It describes people waving at passing troops and children running up to shake their hands and say thank you.

It's not clear who wrote the letter or organized sending it to soldiers' hometown papers.

Six soldiers reached by GNS directly or through their families said they agreed with the letter's thrust. But none of the soldiers said he wrote it, and one said he didn't even sign it. "

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20031011/frontpage/121390.shtml

The letter this thread itself refers to is particularily dubious; Does anyone really think, in this age of media spin, that the Pentagon would allow a letter out of Iraq to include not just the language that this one does, but also such politically resonant phrases as "Search And Destroy". I don't deny that an angry GI might like to see himself as destroying those towel-headed gooks; The military hires people based on ability, not political correctness. But would the Pentagon let such Vietnam-esque words get home...?

In reality, it's probably written by some arm-chair warrior back home, whose letters and emails don't have to go through military censorship, rather than another example of political astroturf. But honestly, are people really so desperate to accept any justification for their belief system that they'll cling to any old straw which comes floating by? Credit where credit's due, no one but the original armed marching poster seems to have believed it though...

As for the political bias of Snopes, this was an issue on left-leaning blogs a few months back; a summary of which can be found here

http://shock-awe.info/archive/000858.php

Basically Snopes, whilst being accepted as an honest source of factual discussion on controversial topics, was showing an extremely strong bias against Michael Moore. There are links at the above page as to what the originally had up, the story which was revealed about the Bin Laden's flights after 9/11, and the now corrected Snopes page (sans reference to Moore).

[rikzilla]

Originally posted by P.S.A.
I recommend you all do a web search for "Republican Astroturf" and "GOP Team Leader Points" to introduce yourselves to the current state of US politics, especially with regard to how the US media covers it. I'm sure the Democratic party does the same too, but regarding this particular issue, there has been a definate concerted effort to fool newspapers into printing fake 'letters from Iraq on the behalf of Republican/Pro-War supporters;

"WASHINGTON -- Letters from hometown soldiers describing their successes rebuilding Iraq have been appearing in newspapers across the country as U.S. public opinion on the mission sours.
And all the letters are the same.

A Gannett News Service search found identical letters from different soldiers with the 2nd Battalion of the 503rd Airborne Infantry Regiment, also known as "The Rock," in 11 newspapers, including Snohomish, Wash.

The Olympian received two identical letters signed by different hometown soldiers: Spc. Joshua Ackler and Spc. Alex Marois, who is now a sergeant. The paper declined to run either because of a policy not to publish form letters.

The five-paragraph letter talks about the soldiers' efforts to re-establish police and fire departments, and build water and sewer plants in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk, where the unit is based.

"The quality of life and security for the citizens has been largely restored, and we are a large part of why that has happened," the letter reads.

It describes people waving at passing troops and children running up to shake their hands and say thank you.

It's not clear who wrote the letter or organized sending it to soldiers' hometown papers.

Six soldiers reached by GNS directly or through their families said they agreed with the letter's thrust. But none of the soldiers said he wrote it, and one said he didn't even sign it. "

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20031011/frontpage/121390.shtml

The letter this thread itself refers to is particularily dubious; Does anyone really think, in this age of media spin, that the Pentagon would allow a letter out of Iraq to include not just the language that this one does, but also such politically resonant phrases as "Search And Destroy". I don't deny that an angry GI might like to see himself as destroying those towel-headed gooks; The military hires people based on ability, not political correctness. But would the Pentagon let such Vietnam-esque words get home...?

In reality, it's probably written by some arm-chair warrior back home, whose letters and emails don't have to go through military censorship, rather than another example of political astroturf. But honestly, are people really so desperate to accept any justification for their belief system that they'll cling to any old straw which comes floating by? Credit where credit's due, no one but the original armed marching poster seems to have believed it though...

As for the political bias of Snopes, this was an issue on left-leaning blogs a few months back; a summary of which can be found here

http://shock-awe.info/archive/000858.php

Basically Snopes, whilst being accepted as an honest source of factual discussion on controversial topics, was showing an extremely strong bias against Michael Moore. There are links at the above page as to what the originally had up, the story which was revealed about the Bin Laden's flights after 9/11, and the now corrected Snopes page (sans reference to Moore).

PSA,

While I'm sure there are those circulating false "letters from the front" that express support for the WOT. I can assure you that there are also many real ones out there too. I stay in touch with several friends currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. Their notes to me are also much in support of the WOT....and I don't need snopes, the media, or any "debunkers" to tell me if they are real or not. I know these guys personally.

-z

[evildave]

Actually, the military "hires" anyone who volunteers, and then drills into them what to think and not to think, who to talk to, and who not to talk to.

If you have an opinion, it's not generally yours to share with the media. You are ordered and told and reminded to defer all questions to the public relations office. You get lots of training about 'impromptu' meetings with media and such, and gentle little reminders about how deep you'll potentially step in it by opening your big, fat mouth.

If I ever had sent a letter home about how much something "sucked", and it was forwarded to the media, and got published, I would be so, so very screwed. Such things happened to some of the soldiers over there right now, who had the bad sense to actually speak their minds when someone asked.

Here's a little example of what happens when you grouse and the wrong ear hears it:
http://new.globalfreepress.com/War/03/07/19/0351259.shtml
http://www.bet.com/articles/0,1048,c3gb6894-7698-1,00.html
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0808-01.htm

"'We liberated Iraq. Now the people here don't want us here, and guess what? We don't want to be here either," he said. "So why are we still
here? Why don't they bring us home?'"
--PFC Jason Ring


If you are the one chosen to speak to the media, you're probably not any of the ones who grouse about just letting all the "rag-heads" kill each other.

I select this term because I had never heard it, nor "sand ni**er", or other such "catchy" terms before I was in the Air Force and stationed in Saudi Arabia to watch Iran and Iraq kill each other, and make sure nothing flew towards Saudi Arabia without a 'heads up'. Actually, I only watched the computer equipment while other people watched the dots. As long as the dots weren't comming my way, I didn't really care where they were going, or what they were doing, as long as they displayed on the consoles right. Just dots.

Nobody ever asked my opinion about it, and frankly, I never cared. It was Saudi Arabia in summer to watch those guys kill each other, and Iceland in winter to watch the bears probe our air defense RADAR and responses. My opinion? "Oh, yeah! Per-diem, baby!"

It wasn't Dubya's daddy that won the cold war.

*It was me, dammit!*

Changin' those tapes and swabbing those switches with alcahol and keeping track of what broke on the airplane that finally broke the commies' backs!

Yup, without me, we'd still have the scary, atheistic, commy Soviet Union for everybody to hate, and the Berlin wall.

No wonder nobody asked me....

[Ladewig]

A quick search on the letter turns up about a dozen postings. Most reference a SOCOM (Special Operations Command) officer as forwarding the message. I am somewhat skeptical because SOCOM includes the Army's Psychological Operations Command. Their purpose is to improve America's image by influencing all formal and informal media outlets in hostile or potentially hostile countries. I suppose a zealous Army officer might consider it a very small step from writing false news stories for foreign papers to writing false stories for domestic papers. For that reason, I am somewhat, but not entirely skeptical of this letter's authenticity.

[P.S.A.]

Ladewig, which letter did you pull up with those references, the original one, or the second one I refered to as another example of political astroturf? I suppose it doesn't really matter, both are equally false...

Rikzilla; "I can assure you that there are also many real ones out there too."

There certainly will be. The question is, are they to be trusted in their understanding? I direct all sides attention to the article from the Skeptical Inquirer called "Eye Witness Testimony And The Paranormal" which illustrates how belief shapes what people think they are seeing. The people you know may be honest. But can they be described as truly objective? How much does their belief in what they have been sent to do affect what they believe they are seeing?

[Ladewig]

Ladewig, which letter did you pull up with those references, the original one, or the second one I refered to as another example of political astroturf? I suppose it doesn't really matter, both are equally false..

I found about ten instances of that letter. All the ones that were officially published electronically or physically (including the Chronwatch site at the beginning of this thread) referenced the FrontPageMagazine.com publication. A few sites simply described it as a forwarded e-mail. This letter is different from the letter debunked by the Olympian, which refers to the 503 Airborne.

I don't think this particular letter can be classified as pure astroturf because none of the ten instances has a name listed at the end of the letter; therefore almost all publications would refuse to print it.

On the other hand, one more strike against the letter is that the writer, stationed in Bagdad, has detailed knowledge of what is being broadcast in Britain and the U.S.

[P.S.A.]

Ahh... I see. You are correct on the media element being suspicious too; I recall at least one BBC report during the war as to how the BBC World Service/News 24 was banned from HMS Ark Royal as it was considered to not be carrying the correctly supportive line (Ie, it was trying to be neutral, not rah-rah patriotic like the Murdoch media). I find it doubtful too that active service people would have intimate (although they may still have some) awareness of what the home media were carrying.

[Garrette]

Ladewig:

I am somewhat skeptical because SOCOM includes the Army's Psychological Operations Command. Their purpose is to improve America's image by influencing all formal and informal media outlets in hostile or potentially hostile countries. I suppose a zealous Army officer might consider it a very small step from writing false news stories for foreign papers to writing false stories for domestic papers.


A point of clarification, with the admission up front that there is nothing I can say to make you believe me:

PSYOP is not allowed to lie. The military has its deception campaigns regarding operational issues, but PSYOP does not participate in them. Everything they print or broadcast must be, to the best of their knowledge, true. I won't deny that the things they present are carefully selected and carefully written, and might even be said to have 'spin,' but deception would get people in trouble.

{I have been PSYOP in the past, including one years as Executive Officer for a PSYOP battalion}

[Earthborn]

Originally posted by P.S.A.
...and the now corrected Snopes page (sans reference to Moore). If you click to the snopes page now, you will see that Barbara Mikkelson now makes a full apology to Moore. So I guess this means that: yes, the Snopes people are biased like everybody else. No, they don't feel they are above the need to correct themselves.

[Cinorjer]

Even were the letter authentic, it's still a "So what?" situation. These letters pro and con are designed to appeal to the emotions, not reason. People serving in the military come in all flavors and political persuasions. I served many years in the military including the Pentagon, and my observation is that wearing a uniform does not give someone any special insight into complex world events.

The soldiers can tell us what actual frontline conditions are like, but there's nothing new in the letters. We know that some service is being restored, but we also know continued sabotage has made restoring more than partial service impossible. We know that most of the Iraq population is glad a brutal dictator is gone, but we also know this population is beginning to see us as an occupying force and wants us out of their country.

Some soldiers see being in Iraq as a big mistake and just want to go home with their skin intact, and some want to liberate the world in the name of the Truth, Justice, and the American Way. So these letters say only what you'd expect.

[Malachi151]

I saw a poll that showed the various moral "ratings" of each group of people in Iraq, Army, Marines, Air Force, and Reserve. The Marines reported the highest moral, the Reserve the lowest, big suprize.

The experiance varries greatly among individuals was the main point brought home by the piece, though I can't find the link for it again.

[P.S.A.]

Earthborn, it's good that Snopes corrects themselves. It shows honesty. But how many people who used the original Snopes article to attack Moore have since corrected their own prejudices? In other words, how many people will now admit what Snopes themselves admit, that they carry a bias, and that the truth was other than they claimed?
(Incidentally, this is why Snopes is admirable, and Ann Coulter is not. And why 'he who follows the left hand path towards self satisfaction' is so risible)

[Ladewig]

A point of clarification, with the admission up front that there is nothing I can say to make you believe me:

PSYOP is not allowed to lie. The military has its deception campaigns regarding operational issues, but PSYOP does not participate in them. Everything they print or broadcast must be, to the best of their knowledge, true. I won't deny that the things they present are carefully selected and carefully written, and might even be said to have 'spin,' but deception would get people in trouble.


My bad. Sorry.

[Skeptic]

All people have some sort of bias, including Snopes.

... a bias AUP can INSTANTLY detect by the fact that biased people DISAGREE with him.

[Ian Osborne]

Check this out...

http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20031011/frontpage/letter.gif

[Lyle Beaudoin]

A soldier thinking it's really neat they got the power grid running doesn't justify this war. Soldiers' opinions don't enter into it.

The faked letters don't really shock me. Some people have no shame.

[arcticpenguin]

There's another thread (http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?threadid=28635) now on 'form letters' from Iraq.