The Pentagon's Message, And Ours: 5 Analysts Reply

Team Infidel

Forum Spin Doctor
New York Times
May 1, 2008 To the Editor:
We object to “Behind TV Analysts, Pentagon’s Hidden Hand” (front page, April 20) and its assertion that military analysts are tools of a Pentagon propaganda machine.
We have never stated anything about defense or national security that we did not believe to be true. Equally important, we also have served the essential wartime function of helping civilians be better informed about our military, our enemies and how the war is being conducted.
Those of us who had a similar arrangement with the Clinton administration are confident that what you have been reporting is really old news.
We have said and will continue to say what we truly believe after looking at all information and facts available to us through the prism of our extensive professional military experience.
Suggesting that we intentionally misled the American people for partisan political purposes or some quid pro quo personal gain is an unconscionable attack on our honor and long service to this nation.
We participated in Pentagon briefings and television and radio network interviews chiefly because our hosts believed we had the credentials to do so as military professionals.
We will continue to speak out honestly to the American people about national security threats. Like our military service, we consider it our duty.
Thomas G. McInerney, Paul E. Vallely, Charles T. Nash, William V. Cowan and Wayne Simmons, Clifton, Va., April 25, 2008
The writers are, respectively, a retired Air Force lieutenant general, a retired Army major general, a retired Navy captain, a retired Marine lieutenant colonel and a retired United States intelligence officer.
Editor's Note: The article by David Barstow appeared in the Current News Early Bird, April 20, 2008.
 
Back
Top