SourceWatch needs your financial support to survive and thrive. If you've found this information on the people, organizations, and issues shaping the public agenda helpful, please make a tax-deductible donation now.

Freedom's Watch/pro-war in Iraq ad campaign

From SourceWatch

Jump to: navigation, search
This article is part of SourceWatch coverage of Freedom's Watch
Main article:
Sub-articles:
Related articles:

On August 22, 2007, Ari Fleischer, "dual U.S.-Israel citizen", former White House press secretary to President George W. Bush,[1] spokesman and a founding board member of Freedom's Watch, said the group is "rolling out television, radio and Internet advertisements in more than 20 states and 60 Congressional districts", spending "$15 million on the effort [to] encourage voters to put pressure on their representatives for continued support" of the war in Iraq.[2][3]

"'Victory,' Mr. Fleisher proclaims, 'is the only objective,'" Robert Fantina wrote in the August 25/26, 2007, weekend edition of CounterPunch.[4] "'Victory' is such a positive-sounding term to banter around as if it were a tennis ball. But it must have a definition, and neither Mr. Fleisher or his former boss, the self-proclaimed war president, have bothered to provide one. Obscure references to the 'war on terror,' or the undefined and, as was proven in Iraq, non-existent threat to the American way of life do not define victory. Perhaps Mr. Fleisher and Mr. Bush would prefer to keep vague any such definition for an unwinnable war, a civil strife in which the U.S. has no business. Perhaps the unused, but obvious name for the war, 'Operation Iraqi Liberation' (OIL) really points to Messrs Fleisher and Bush's criteria for victory."

Using a propaganda tactic similar to that currently being employed by the pro-war in Iraq Republican front group Vets for Freedom, Freedom's Watch will use ads featuring "Iraq war veterans and parents of veterans who lost family members in the war"[5] to urge both Republican and Democratic members of Congress "who have supported the war not to switch their vote". The "central message" will be that "the war in Iraq can be won and Congress must not surrender[6]".[2]

"The big ad buy, funded by high-profile Republicans who were aides and supporters of President Bush, reflects a furious public relations battle that will unfold as Congress debates the crucial progress report by Gen. David Petraeus, which is due Sept. 15.," Mike Allen wrote August 22, 2007, in The Politico.[7]

Contents

Opening ad

The opening ad[8] produced by Jamestown Associates, a self-described "full-service Republican political and public affairs consulting firm"[9] with offices in Washington, D.C., Princeton, N.J., Baton Rouge, La., and Dallas, Texas,[10] "shows a military veteran saying:[7]

Congress was right to vote to fight terrorism in Iraq and Afghanistan. I re-enlisted after Sept. 11 because I don’t want my sons to see what I saw. I want them to be free and safe. I know what I lost. I also know that if we pull out now everything I’ve given and the sacrifices will mean nothing. They attacked us and they will again.[11] They won’t stop in Iraq. We are winning on the ground and making real progress. It’s no time to quit. It’s no time for politics.

"The ad's message 'It's no time to quit; It's no time for politics' is especially ironic since this video campaign was produced and funded by Republican operatives and targeted on the districts of wavering and vulnerable Republican legislators, with the clear purpose of putting political pressure on them to continue backing the President's war," PAF wrote August 24, 2007, at the Premature Anti-Fascists Blogspot.[12]

"What most struck me most about the group though, were not its ads, but an appearance [August 22, 2007,] on Hardball by one of its founding members, former White House spokesman Ari Fleischer. His naïveté was stunning; he thinks that, 'everybody in this country is making a sacrifice' in the war. Worst of all, he couldn't even name the brave soldier his group was using in its ads," Marcus Alexander Gadson commented August 31, 2007, at Blogcritics.org. [13]

"Paul Rieckhoff, the next guest on the show said it best: 'What bothered me most is that Ari Fleischer didn't even know the guy's name. He's willing to run a multi-million dollar campaign utilizing the personal story of a soldier, and he couldn't tell you on national TV what that soldier's name is...Our troops are not political props and they're not chew toys'."[13]

"Like any effective propaganda, the ads employ a mind-bending combination of emotional manipulation, fear-mongering, and comical breaches of logic," Matt Snyders commented August 24, 2007, in the Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minn., City Pages.[14]

"Today, right smack in the middle of the Channel 5 mid-day news," one blogger commented August 24, 2007,[15] Freedom's Watch "put a little old lady on my television telling me 'We've already had one 9/11, we don't need another one...' I couldn't believe what I was hearing. Using the memory of 9/11 to try and get us to line up and support the regime... how much more tasteless can we get? Maybe show me the scene of people jumping from the upper floors of the WTC towers with the voice over 'They're coming ... they hate you... they can't wait to watch you die...' Or, a picture of Carl Rove and Dick Cheney standing over a small child in a protective pose, but a little George W. Bush climbing up the sheets and yelling into the sleeping child's ear "WAKE UP... AL QUAEDA IS COMING... AL QUAEDA IS COMING!!!'"

On August 29, 2007, John Stolworthy made the following comments about the Travis Youngblood ad[16] in a Yahoo! 360° Blog posting:[17]

"First off, let's clear up some inaccuracies. Travis Youngblood was killed by an IED, probably from Iraqi insurgents, not Al Queda. Congress never voted to 'defeat terrorism in Iraq', only to authorize use of force for violation of UN resolutions. [Laura] Youngblood, who appears in that ad has, in the recent past, made some comments which are very critical of the United States military and the way they handled notifying family of injury and death."

Additionally, the Freedom's Watch "campaign clearly suggests that if the US loses in Iraq, it will be because anti-war forces, lefties, Democrats and other weak and disloyal elements sold out American troops and betrayed their sacrifices. This is the core story-line of the classic fascist propaganda weapon, the 'stab-in-the-back' myth,"[18] PAF wrote.[12][19]

"The inappropriately named 'Freedom's Watch' may succeed in swaying some members of Congress; when one listens more to lobbyists than to constituents, anything is possible. But that organization's activities will not stop the bloodletting in Iraq. Any freedom they are watching is not that of the Iraqi people, once oppressed by Saddam Hussein and now by George Bush. If Mr. Fleisher & Co. are not interested in bringing American soldiers home, perhaps they would prefer to use their $15,000,000 to supplement the Pentagon's budget and send MRAPs to Iraq by air rather than by sea. This may at least help to achieve their goal of 'funding the troops.' But the safety of anyone, American or Iraqi, does not appear to be on their agenda. A political victory for the misguided and drowning Republican Party seems to be their goal," Fantina wrote.[4]

Support for Bush's "Iraq war strategy with a multimillion dollar ad campaign"

Freedom's Watch rolled out a new tv ad[20] on September 13, 2007, which "capitalizes on Democratic Party unease over a newspaper ad run this week by MoveOn.org, one of the leading anti-war voices among liberal activists," the Associated Press's Jim Kuhnhenn wrote.[21]

"The MoveOn ad appeared Monday in The New York Times on the morning of Petraeus' first appearance before Congress to testify about conditions in Iraq. The ad accused Petraeus of 'cooking the books' for the White House. 'General Petraeus or General Betray Us?' it asked, playing off his name," Kuhnhenn wrote.[21]

Freedom's Watch, which "also plans to run a print ad" in the New York Times, states in its new ad: "Name calling, charges of betrayal it's despicable. It's what MoveOn shamefully does - and it's wrong. America and the forces of freedom are winning. MoveOn is losing. Call your Congressman and Senator. Tell them to condemn MoveOn," Kuhnhenn wrote.[21]

September 11, 2001 anniversary full-page newspaper ad

Freedom's Watch took advantage of the sixth anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist atttacks by publishing "its newest advertisements in support of winning the War on Terror and victory in Iraq" in the New York Times, Washington Post and USA TODAY. The ad reads:[22]

"Surrender to terrorists is not an option. On September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda attacked America, killing thousands of innocent people. This was followed by terrorist attacks in Spain, London, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and in other places.
"Just last week, a major terrorist attack was prevented in Germany.
"The war against terrorism is real and it is not going away. It is a global war that must be fought and won.
"Now, Congress must make an important and historic choice: Surrender to terrorist in Iraq or help that government defeat the terrorists.
"Today is a day of reflection, of remembrance and resolve. Let us reflect on the lessons learned on 9/11-the terrorists attacked us before and they are trying to do so again. Let us remember those who died that day. And let us resolve to never let it happen again."

Ad runs during Fox News' Petraeus "interview"

Freedom's Watch ads were "interspersed" with the September 10, 2007, Fox News' "exclusive" interview with Lt.Gen. David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker. [23]

"The television commercial is grim and gripping: A soldier who lost both legs in an explosion near Fallujah explains why he thinks U.S. forces need to stay in Iraq," Peter Baker wrote in the Washington Post.[24] "Investigations have shown Iraq did not, in fact, have anything to do with the Sept. 11 attacks. But the ad, part of a $15 million media blitz by an advocacy group allied with the White House, may be the most overt attempt during Congress' debate over the war to link the attacks with Iraq," Baker wrote.[24]

Ad runs during Fox News' Republican presidential debate

A Freedom's Watch ad was run on September 5, 2007, during the break at approximately 9:30pm (EST) of the Republican presidential debate hosted by Fox News and held at the University of New Hampshire.[25]

MSNBC, CNBC "Refuse to Run Pro-War Ads": A note from the right-wing echo chamber

"Freedom's Watch has placed its ads on Fox and CNN, but CNBC and MSNBC have refused to run the ads," John Hinderaker reported August 28, 2007, at right-wing Power Line Blog:[26]

"Ari Fleischer wrote this morning on behalf of Freedom's Watch to let us know that CNBC and MSNBC have stubbornly refused to air the pro-war ads, even though they have run issue ads on other controversial topics."

Bradley A. Blakeman, Freedom's Watch President and CEO, "has written to CNBC and MSNBC to protest their decision," Hinderaker informed.[26]

Note that Fleischer's alleged "letter" was apparently received only by Power Line. It has been repeated throughout the right-wing blogosphere ... with Power Line as the sole source.

After circulating for 24-hours, Hinderaker's post was picked up—and obligingly disseminated—on August 29, 2007, by Michael Falcone of the New York Times:[27]

"The group [Freedom's Watch] planned to broadcast television and radio ads, which will air in 60 Congressional districts, to coincide with the run-up to the release of a report from Gen. David Petraeus that will evaluate progress in Iraq. But, it appears that not every network is willing to run the spots.
"Just today, John Hinderaker of the conservative Power Line blog, noted that the group 'placed its ads on Fox and CNN, but CNBC and MSNBC have refused to run' them. Bradley A. Blakeman, the president of Freedom's Watch, send a letter to NBC asking for an explanation."

An August 29, 2007, editorial in Investor's Business Daily, owned by publisher and editor William J. O'Neil who predicted in January 2003 that the war in Iraq would only last about six weeks,[28] repeats Hinderaker's posting while lambasting ABC News' initial report[29] on Freedom's Watch and MSNBC's Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann for their online comments about the Bush administration's war in Iraq. The editorial offers no new information.[30]

Writing August 29, 2007, at Townhall.com, former Republican House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who resigned his leadership in 2005 following his indictment on conspiracy charges, berated NBC, saying "instead of simply reporting on the issue at hand, NBC is outright refusing to air these pro-Iraq war ads on MSNBC or CNBC." DeLay offers no new information.[31]

RedState, a conservative blog owned by Eagle Publishing, the parent company of, among others, Human Events Online and Regnery Publishing, picked up and linked to Hinderaker's post. Poster haystack wrote "Apparently, Pro America and Pro Victory money is too 'dirty'[26] for CNBC & MSNBC according to PowerLine Blog. AND, if you have ANYONE helping your cause in support of finishing the job in Iraq that may have EVER worked for President Bush,[32] you can forget about being credible in the eyes of the fruits and nuts out there hell bent on losing NO MATTER WHAT[33]."[34]

Again, again and again, the only source for the information comes from Hinderaker. Neither the Times Falcone, Investors Business Daily, DeLay or RedState provided any corroborating information.

Additionally, poster KingOneEye made the following observation at progressive blog The Daily Kos: "NBC has yet to respond to the complaint so it is unknown at this time what their reasons for declining the ad might be, if in fact it was declined." (Emphasis added.)[35]

Resources

References

  1. ↑ Deanna Spingola, "The power elite playbook, promoting war (Part One)," RenewAmerica, September 1, 2007.
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 "Group to Urge War Support," New York Times, August 22, 2007.
  3. ↑ Freedom's Watch has posted videos of the ads on YouTube. See User:Freedomswatch, YouTube.
  4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Robert Fantina, "Ari Fleischer, Freedom Watch and the Pro-War Lobbyists. The GOP's Pre-emptive Strike," CounterPunch, August 25/26, 2007.
  5. ↑ Mae, "Who are these people?" The Daily Kos, August 22, 2007.
  6. ↑ Note that the question has been raised around the blogosphere as to whom Congress would be surrendering.
  7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Mike Allen, "Pro-Bush group spends $15M defending war," The Politico (posted by Free Republic), August 22, 2007.
  8. ↑ "Freedom's Watch - Veteran," Hoosierpundit Blogspot, August 25, 2007.
  9. ↑ Company, Jamestown Associates, accessed August 23, 2007.
  10. ↑ Contact, Jamestown Associates, accessed August 23, 2007.
  11. ↑ The ads erroneously link the war in Iraq with the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, despite any reliable evidence that Iraq played any role whatsoever.
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 PAF, "Freedom's Watch," Premature Anti-Fascists Blogspot, August 24, 2007.
  13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Marcus Alexander Gadson, "Making Soldiers into Propaganda," Blogcritics.org, August 31, 2007.
  14. ↑ Matt Snyders, "Stuck between Iraq and a smug face," The Blotter Blog/City Pages (Minn.), August 24, 2007.
  15. ↑ Random Jeff, "Freedom's Watch ... Fear Based Bitchy Advertising," That Guy From That Place/Vox.com, August 24, 2007.
  16. ↑ "Freedom's Watch - Travis," Hoosierpundit Blogspot, August 26, 2007.
  17. ↑ John Stolworthy, Entry for August 29, 2007, Yahoo! 360° Blog.
  18. ↑ Bob Burnett, "Bush's Iraqi endgame. The United States president's unbending approach to Iraq is rooted in advice from Vietnam-era confidantes who worked for Richard Nixon," openDemocracy, July 17, 2007.
  19. ↑ John Turner, "Hearts, Minds and Money," Parkdale Pictures Blogspot, August 24, 2007. Includes YouTube video of media coverage.
  20. ↑ Mark Memmott and Jill Lawrence, "Giuliani, others in GOP target New York Times over bill for MoveOn ad," On Politics Blog/USA TODAY, September 13, 2007. Click on YouTube ad.
  21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 "Pro-Bush group airs new war ads," Associated Press (Washington Post), September 13, 2007.
  22. ↑ "DC Group Announces Full Page Ads Calling on Congress to Win the War on Terror," Southwest Nebraska News, September 11, 2007.
  23. ↑ Josh Marshall, "So Low," Talking Points Memo, September 10, 2007.
  24. ↑ 24.0 24.1 Peter Baker, "9/11 Linked To Iraq, In Politics if Not in Fact," Washington Post, September 12, 2007.
  25. ↑ "GOP Debate Open Thread," AMERICAblog, September 5, 2007.
  26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 26.2 John Hinderaker, "MSNBC, CNBC Refuse to Run Pro-War Ads," Power Line Blog, August 28, 2007. A copy of Blakeman's letter is available on Power Line's weblog.
  27. ↑ Michael Falcone, "MSNBC, CNBC Refuse To Air Pro-War Group's Ads," New York Times (The Huffington Post), August 29, 2007.
  28. ↑ "O’Neil: You Can Make Money in Stocks," NewsMax, January 28, 2003.
  29. ↑ Jake Tapper and Avery Miller, "Selling the War, Through Advertising. Sept. 11 Widows and Iraq Vets Join Bush Supporters in New Ad Campaign," ABC News, August 22, 2007.
  30. ↑ "Anti-War Agenda," Investor's Business Daily, August 29, 2007.
  31. ↑ Tom DeLay, "Tom DeLay's Action Points: Tell NBC 'Shame on You'," Townhall.com, August 29, 2007.
  32. ↑ Sridhar Pappu, "White House Vet Ari Fleischer, Back to Fight for The Surge in Iraq," Washington Post, August 24, 2007.
  33. ↑ S.A. Miller, "Democrats cool to Iraqi accord," Washington Times, August 29, 2007.
  34. ↑ "Pro-American Victory Money Not Good Enough For MSNBC And CNBC," RedState, August (29/30), 2007.
  35. ↑ KingOneEye, "Networks Refuse To Air Liberal Ads Much More Often Than Conservatives," The Daily Kos, August 29, 2007.
Retrieved from "http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Freedom%27s_Watch/pro-war_in_Iraq_ad_campaign"
Personal tools

Be a SourceWatcher!

Enter your e-mail address to get the Center for Media and Democracy's free weekly e-newsletter.