• The Seduction of Brian Williams: Embedded with the Military

    February 11, 2015

    Tags: ,
    Posted in: Embassy/State, Iraq, Military

    DSCN1081


    Brian Williams was seduced.

    He is a liar of course, someone who did not tell the truth no matter the reason or excuse, a bad trait for a journalist. Williams lied about being RPG’ed in a helicopter over Iraq; he did not see any variant of what you can see in the photo above. And that’s not a hard thing to “misremember.”

    But if there is any reason to forgive Williams, it was that he was seduced by both his own conflation of his sad little life as a talking head and the “brave troops,” and, more clearly, by the process of embedding with the military. I know. I saw it.



    Journalists into Liars

    What is it about the military that turns many normally thoughtful journalists into liars? A reporter who would otherwise make it through the day sober spends a little time with some unit of the U.S. military and promptly loses himself in ever more dramatic language about bravery and sacrifice, stolen in equal parts from Thucydides, Henry V, and Sergeant Rock comics.

    I’m neither a soldier nor a journalist. I was a diplomat who spent 12 months as a Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT) leader, embedded with the military in Iraq, and let me tell you that nobody laughed harder at the turgid prose reporters used to describe their lives than the soldiers themselves. They knew they were trading hours of boredom for maybe minutes of craziness that only in retrospect seemed “exciting,” as opposed to scary, confusing, and chaotic. That said, the laziest private knew from growing up watching TV exactly what flavor to feed a visiting reporter.

    In trying to figure out why journalists and assorted militarized intellectuals from inside the Beltway lose it around the military, I remembered a long afternoon spent with a gaggle of “fellows” from a prominent national security think tank who had flown into Iraq. These scholars wrote serious articles and books that important people read; they appeared on important Sunday morning talk shows; and they served as consultants to even more important people who made decisions about the Iraq War and assumedly other conflicts to come.

    One of them had been on the staff of a general whose name he dropped more often than Jesus’s at a Southern Baptist A.A. meeting. He was a real live neocon. A quick Google search showed he had strongly supported going to war in Iraq, wrote apology pieces after no one could find any weapons of mass destruction there (“It was still the right thing to do”), and was back to check out just how well democracy was working out for a paper he was writing to further justify the war. He liked military high-tech, wielded words like “awesome,” “superb,” and “extraordinary” (pronounced EXTRA-ordinary) without irony to describe tanks and guns, and said in reference to the Israeli Army, “They give me a hard-on.”


    Fearing the Media vs. Using the Media

    Such figures are not alone. Nerds, academics, and journalists have had trouble finding ways to talk, write, or think about the military in a reasonably objective way. A minority of them have spun off into the dark side, focused on the My Lai, Full Metal Jacket, and Platoon-style psycho killers. But most spin in the other direction, portraying our men and women in uniform as regularly, daily, hourly saving Private Ryan, stepping once more into the breach, and sacking out each night knowing they are abed with brothers.

    I sort of did it, too. As a State Department Foreign Service Officer embedded with the military in Iraq, I walked in… er, deployed, unprepared. I had never served in the military and had rarely fired a weapon (and never at anything bigger than a beer can on a rock ledge). The last time I punched someone was in ninth grade. Yet over the course of a year, I found myself living and working with the 82nd Airborne, followed by the 10th Mountain Division, and finally the 3rd Infantry Division, three of the most can-do units in the Army. It was… seductive.

    The military raised a lot of eyebrows in my part of the world early in the Iraq invasion with their policy of embedding journalists with front-line troops. Other than preserving OpSec (Operational Security for those of you who have never had The Experience) and not giving away positions and plans to the bad guys, journalists were free to see and report on anything. No restrictions, no holding back.

    So, in 2003, we diplomats sat back and smugly speculated that the military didn’t mean it, that they’d stage-manage what embedded journalists would see and who they would be allowed to speak to. After all, if someone screwed up and the reporter saw the real thing, it would end up in disaster, as in fact happened when Rolling Stone’s Michael Hastings got Afghan War commander Stanley McCrystal axed as a “runaway general.”

    We were, however, dead wrong. As everyone now agrees, journalists saw what they saw and talked to whomever they chose and the military facilitated the process. Other than McCrystal (who was redeemed by the same president who fired him), can anyone name another military person whacked by reporting?

    I’m waiting.



    Embed in Action

    I saw it myself in Iraq. General Ray Odierno, then commander of all troops in Iraq, would routinely arrive at some desert dump where I happened to be, reporters in tow. I saw for myself that they would be free to speak about anything to anyone on that Forward Operating Base (which, in acronym-mad Iraq, we all just called a FOB, rhymes with “cob”). The only exception would be me: State had a long-standing policy that on-the-record interviews with its officials had to be pre-approved by the Embassy or often by the Washington Mothership itself.

    Getting such an approval before a typical reporter’s deadline ran out was invariably near impossible, which assumedly was the whole point of the system. In fact, the rules got even tougher over the course of my year in the desert. When I arrived, the SOP (standard operating procedure) allowed Provincial Reconstruction Team leaders to talk to foreign media without preapproval (on the assumption that no one in Washington read their pieces in other languages anyway and thus no one in the field could get into trouble). This was soon rescinded countrywide and preapproval was required even for these media interactions.

    Detouring around me, the reporters would ask soldiers their opinions on the war, the Army, or even controversial policies. The reporters would sit through the briefings the general received, listening in as he asked questions. They were exposed to classified material, and trusted not to reveal it in print. They would go out on patrols led by 24-year-old lieutenants, where life-and-death decisions were often made, and were free to report on whatever they saw. It always amazed me — like that scene in The Wizard of Oz where everything suddenly changes from black and white into color.


    Fear Not: The Force Is With You

    But the military wasn’t worried. Why? Because its officials knew perfectly well that for reporters the process was — not to mince words — seductive. The world, it turns out, is divided into two groups, those who served in the military and those who didn’t. For the rare journalists with service time, this would be homecoming, a chance to relive their youth filtered through memory. For the others, like me, embedding with the military felt like being invited in — no, welcomed — for the first time by the cool kids.

    You arrive and, of course, you feel awkward, out of place. Everyone has a uniform on and you’re wearing something inappropriate you bought at L.L. Bean. You don’t know how to wear your body-armor vest and helmet, which means that someone has to show you how to dress yourself. When was the last time that happened? Instead of making fun of you, though, the soldier is cool with it and just helps.

    Then, you start out not knowing what the hell anyone is saying, because they throw around terms like FOB and DFAC and POS and LT and BLUF and say Hoo-ah, but sooner or later someone begins to explain them to you one by one, and after a while you start to feel pretty cool saying them yourself and better yet, repeating them to people at home in emails and, if you’re a journalist, during live reports. (“Sorry Wolf, that’s an insider military term. Let me explain it to our viewers…”)

    You go out with the soldiers and suddenly you’re riding in some kind of armored, motorized monster truck. You’re the only one without a weapon and so they have to protect you. Instead of making fun of you and looking at you as if you were dressed as a Naughty Schoolgirl, they’re cool with it. Bored at only having one another to talk to, fellow soldiers who eat the exact same food, watch the exact same TV, and sleep, pee and work together every day for a year, the troops see you as quite interesting. You can’t believe it, but they really do want to know what you know, where you’ve been, and what you’ve seen — and you want to tell them.

    Even though you may be only a few years older than many of them, you feel fatherly. For women, it works similarly, but with the added bonus that, no matter what you look like, you’re treated as the most beautiful female they’ve seen in the last six months — and it’s probably true.

    The same way one year in a dog’s life equals seven human years, every day spent in a war zone is the equivalent of a month relationship-wise. You quickly grow close to the military people you’re with, and though you may never see any of them again after next week, you bond with them.

    You arrived a stranger and a geek. Now, you eat their food, watch their TV, and sleep, pee, and work together every day. These are your friends, at least for the time you’re together, and you’re never going to betray them. Under those circumstances, it’s harder than hell to say anything bad about the organization whose lowest ranking member just gave up his sleeping bag without prompting because you were too green and dumb to bring one with you.



    Why It Matters

    So, take my word for it, it’s really, really hard to write about the military objectively, even if you try. That’s not to say that all journalists are shills; it’s just a warning for you to take care when you’re hanging out with, or reading, our warrior-pundits.

    It is also to say that journalists who embed and do write objective pieces are to be read, revered and respected.

    And yet having some perspective on the military and what it does matters as we threaten to slip into yet more multigenerational wars without purpose, watch the further militarization of foreign affairs, and devote ever more of our national budget to the military. War lovers and war pornographers can’t offer us an objective look at a world in which more and more foreigners only run into Americans when they are wearing green and carrying weapons.

    I respect my military colleagues, at least the ones who took it all seriously enough to deserve that respect, and would not speak ill of them. Some do indeed make enormous sacrifices, including of their own lives, even if for reasons that are ambiguous at best to a majority of Americans. But in order to understand these men and women and the tasks they are set to, we need journalists who are willing to type with both hands, not just pass on their own wet dreams to a gullible public.

    Civilian control of our military is a cornerstone of our republic, and we the people need to base our decisions on something better than Sergeant Rock comic rewrites.



    Related Articles:




    Copyright © 2019. All rights reserved. The views expressed here are solely those of the author(s) in their private capacity.

    Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedin
  • Recent Comments

    • Rich Bauer said...

      1

      “Civilian control of our military is a cornerstone of our republic.”

      Like Dick Cheney, the civilian-chickenhawk who controlled the military with lies.

      02/11/15 3:57 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...

      2

      quote”Brian Williams was seduced.”unquote

      So was the entire DFCOTP, BECAUSE of liars like him throughout the MSM and the government.

      02/11/15 4:18 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...

      3

      Could someone start a petition, call , or on facebook do something … a #tag thing, or selfie,tweet,request etc. to have NBC replace Brian Williams with John Kiriakou, or if not that Comedy Central Daily Show? (Disclaimer—-I do not have a cell,tweet or cut and paste). Text me anytime except when driving!

      02/11/15 7:28 PM | Comment Link

    • chuck nasmith said...

      4

      I like Free Truth tellers. Its a good job with much respect.

      02/11/15 7:37 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...

      5

      02/11/15 8:29 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...

      6

      Gosh, if we are going to get rid of all the journalists and reporters who lie, then who will talk to us on the TV or write articles in the newspapers for us? Who, I ask you, would give us our news?

      My stars, we wouldn’t have a CLUE as to what was really going on in the world.

      02/11/15 8:37 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...

      7

      By the way, forgiving a journalist [sic] for knowingly lying is like forgiving the parish priest for molesting the little kids who come in all freshly scrubbed to serve as altar-boys. We have these poor dumbass Americans tuning in every night and they – God bless their sad, ignorant, gullible selves – are ready to believe all of it. Those lying assholes who have the nerve to call themselves reporters are no better than the grifters they serve. (Remember the RCA dog: “his master’s voice”? Yeah. Gives it a new meaning.)

      In the case of Brian Williams, who for the life of me I can’t ever remember watching on purpose, I don’t give a shit about his imaginary mystical trip in a helicopter that turned out to be just a bad ‘shroom vision; it’s all that other shit he and all the rest of them need their asses kicked down the street for. Let him go serve his masters for real: give him a gun and drop his sorry butt in one of the war-zones he helped sell. And he can explain up-close and personal-like to the band of brothers, the comrades-in-arms, the stooges as the masters of the universe like to call them, how it is they were stupid enough to actually believe him and ended up getting all brain-injured and shot at and shit in a foreign country just so Exxon could get the oil for free and Halliburton and Raytheon could make some serious jack.

      See if they feel much like helping him button up his flak jacket up then.

      02/11/15 9:03 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...

      8

      Peter, you may have forgotten that ALL of those who you met who were soldiering in Iraq and other invasion points were volunteers. The National Guard reserve guys were never expecting to actually be called to active duty. They took their pay for playing “emergency soldier” but were shocked and pissed when the paymaster told them to suit up for real.
      Anyone who hadn’t informed themself about the clear immorality of invading deserves no pity nor “respect”,

      02/11/15 9:31 PM | Comment Link

    • STREETS OF GOLD » The Seduction of Brian Williams: Embedded with the Military said...

      9

      […] with permission from We Meant Well. Source: Ron Paul […]

      02/12/15 6:45 AM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...

      10

      Brian Williams=American Sniper of journalism

      02/12/15 12:02 PM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...

      11

      Brian Williams = Who cares?

      Most Americans (54 percent) don’t know or don’t care about Brian Williams.

      02/12/15 5:27 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...

      12

      Bauer- I agree. John Stewart is also leaving his perch. Both served empire in their own way. Stewart was a double agent. Progressives thought he was one of them. They had forgotten that the jester always works for and is paid by the King. Stewart’s job was to keep the proles hooting and slapping their thighs instead of reaching for the pitchfork. It was a pretty easy gig spoofing the foibles of the ruling elite-maybe too easy for a double agent.

      02/12/15 8:09 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...

      13

      “Brian Williams = Who cares?”

      Rich..I agree. To tell you the truth..I never heard of him till this hoopla about him came out. After all..I haven’t watched MSM or cable news programs since Walter Cronkite left.

      02/12/15 8:34 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...

      14

      ps..I didn’t even know who John Stewart and the other political joker(?) was until 2 years ago. I still never watched them as propaganda is still propaganda regardless if it’s pitched as a satire.

      02/12/15 8:38 PM | Comment Link

    • bloodypitchfork said...

      15

      Leaving Williams aside for a moment..

      ..look at the picture on this link..and guess who in the picture best illustrates the DFCOTP.

      Here’s a clue..it’s the one that looks like the last patron to leave a Sports bar on the night of Superbowl…on his knees.

      http://images.dailykos.com/images/128898/large/3-USA-Moslems-killed.jpg?1423736145

      sheeesusH.. If I didn’t know any better he looks like the posterchild for every DFCOTHP redneck motherfucker in my little town..if not Murka.
      lord..

      02/12/15 9:20 PM | Comment Link

    • tim hansen said...

      16

      Seems like you don’t like the grunts too much. I get a subtle disgust vibe. I was in the 3ID in Iraq. Had a embed of sorts-he was a drag to the mission. State Dept. officials…they really see a lot combat right? They’re so far back they’re almost out of theater. The feeling I get from this article is contempt. Am I wrong?

      02/13/15 6:38 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      17

      You are very wrong about the grunts. I spent my year at two FOBs, mostly with 10th Mountain. Take a look at my book and you’ll see several chapters devoted to the life of regular soldiers. Unlike Brian Williams, I really was mortared multiple times, and spent most of my days outside the wire. Here’s one to take a look at: http://wemeantwell.com/blog/2014/07/04/iraq-what-they-died-for/

      02/13/15 12:58 PM | Comment Link

    • teri said...

      18

      Good Lord, Pitch, I hadn’t seen his photo before. The guy looks like a cartoon of a thug. And he got two different women to marry him? Makes my skin crawl.

      Here’s another off-topic; looks like Oblahblah got his own Darth Vader. This new sec. of defense is a rabid dog who will not hesitate to order troops to fire on US citizens. Matter of fact, he kind of looks forward to the possibility. Read the article slowly; there’s a lot of meat in it to think about, not just info on Carter. (Love how the FBI and counter-terrorism people are warning about ISIS-in-the-US and forecasting at least ten attacks in Das Homeland per year. I guess they might be the best prognosticators, considering their close association with the group that helps to fund/arm/run ISIS – the CIA.)

      http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/13/mili-f13.html

      02/13/15 10:35 AM | Comment Link

    • Rich Bauer said...

      19

      Brian Williams didn’t imagine this threat to US:

      “The federal government can read any emails that are more than six months old without a warrant.

      Little known to most Americans, ambiguous language in a communications law passed in 1986 extends Fourth Amendment protections against unreasonable search and seizure only to electronic communications sent or received fewer than 180 days ago.

      The language, known as the “180-day rule,” allows government officials to treat any emails, text messages or documents stored on remote servers – popularly known as the cloud – as “abandoned” and therefore accessible using administrative subpoena power, a tactic that critics say circumvents due process.

      Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/02/11/256304/government-wonders-whats-in-your.html#storylink=cpy

      02/13/15 12:34 PM | Comment Link

    • John Poole said...

      20

      Tim- did you view In The Valley of Elah? If so did you think that Haggis had disdain or contempt for regular grunts? I’m curious. Your question to PVB seemed earneest and not snarky which to me suggests humble thoughtfulness.

      02/13/15 1:31 PM | Comment Link

    • Ed Grange said...

      21

      Were you a PRT leader or a PRT member? Which PRT and when?

      02/14/15 1:46 PM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      22

      I lead two PRTs, 2009-2010. The first was out of FOB Hammer and the second out of FOB Falcon. The names of our teams changed nearly constantly as the embassy aligned an relaigned things.

      02/14/15 3:25 PM | Comment Link

    • tim hansen said...

      23

      Come on, your using the military slang to give yourself creed. State Dept. are you kidding me? Are you going to step foot in a VAMC and say, “I’m a combat Vet from the State Dept.” Being near the front gave you a little gold star on your resume. The difference was you could leave and of course your salary. I’m not saying you weren’t in a bit of danger, more than Williams, but don’t conflate that into knowing the terror that a Marine or Army Infantryman feels. I just don’t like people that weren’t in combat under arms talking about it in a knowing way. I can’t watch contemporary war movies. I rarely talk about my experiences. Recently I have been struggling.

      02/15/15 3:14 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      24

      I am who I am and I did what I did. I was in Iraq for a year same as the soldiers I was with. I did indeed get paid more than the grunts, about the same as the officers. I ate what they ate, slept where they slept. I wasn’t a soldier, and never pretended I was but when it rained we all got wet. I hope you find peace. It’s a bitch.

      02/15/15 3:50 AM | Comment Link

    • tim hansen said...

      25

      I’m fine with that. Don’t exactly mean to be argumentative, but as a I get older, intrusive thoughts have increased. I am a bit touchy about certain…things. Don’t really know why. If I was rude I apologize.

      02/15/15 5:07 AM | Comment Link

    • wemeantwell said...

      26

      Nothing to apologize for. The questions come up and I answer them. Stick around. There are some interesting folks who post here, and I try to keep it all interesting.

      02/15/15 1:34 PM | Comment Link

    • Bruce said...

      27

      BUGGER Brian! Why are the imperious dupes following the illegal orders To ILLEGAL WARS by the callow (Poppy) Bush cabal of turncoats (including 0 and the Clintons)? Their Uniform Code prescribes the exact opposite!! Potemkin, they Are HERE!!!

      02/16/15 12:41 AM | Comment Link

    Leave A Comment

    Mail (will not be published) (required)

IP Blocking Protection is enabled by IP Address Blocker from LionScripts.com.