Tweet
Last Saturday, firedoglake‘s Book Salon showcased military affairs author and Pultizer Prize-winning journalist, Thomas E. Ricks. The salon was hosted by Susan Glasser from Foreign Policy, where she is Editor-in-Chief, and Tom blogs. The author is promoting his new book, The Generals: American Military Command from World War II to Today. As is usual with guests at fdl‘s salon, Ricks discussed his most recent work with fdl commenters.
Right after the Thanksgiving weekend, the author was on FOX News, being interviewed by “newsman” Jon Scott on the subject FOX just can’t seem to get enough of these days, uh – weeks. Benghazi.
Here’s how it went:
Here’s Politico‘s shot at a transcript, after Scott’s introduction:
“I think that Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially,” Ricks said. “And now that the campaign is over, I think [Sen. John McCain] is backing off a little bit. They’re not going to stop Susan Rice from being Secretary of State.”
Scott pushed back on the accusation that Fox News “hyped” the attack, asking, “When you have four people dead, including the first U.S. ambassador in more than 30 years, how do you call that hype?”
“How many security contractors died in Iraq? Do you know?” Ricks replied.
“I don’t,” Scott said.
“No, nobody does, because nobody cared,” Ricks said. “We know that several hundred died, but there was never an official count done of security contractors dead in Iraq. So when I say this focus on what was essentially a small fire-fight, I think, number one, I’ve covered a lot of fire-fights, it is impossible to figure out what happens in them sometimes.”
Ricks then slammed Fox News again for their Benghazi coverage.
“And second, I think that the emphasis on Benghazi has been extremely political, partly because Fox was operating as a wing of the Republican Party.
After that, Scott wrapped the interview. “Alright, Tom Ricks. Thanks very much for joining us today,” Scott said.
“You’re welcome,” Ricks replied.
There have been a fair number of stories on this already, not at fdl, as far as I can tell. The followup on the nutcase right has been all too predictable. The most questionable so far has been an article published Monday afternoon in The Hollywood Reporter, titled Fox News Exec VP: Guest Who Slammed Network Apologized – But Not Publicly. It had this lead-in update:
UPDATED: Author Tom Ricks accused the network of “hyped” Benghazi coverage; Fox News’ Michael Clemente says Ricks apologized but “doesn’t have the strength of character to do that publicly.” Ricks disputes.
Ricks must also be excited. After all, he’s busy selling books this month, and Christmas lists are being made all over the place.
I’d trust the Hollywood Reporter about as far as I’d trust FOX News. Their only claim to fame in the annals of journalism was a long, long time ago, and it was disgraceful – the September, 1947 “Billy’s List,” the first published version of the Hollywood blacklist of 1948.
Ricks isn’t impressed by the hit jobs on him, or by the level of reportage at HR:
Some guy apparently claiming to be a spokesman for Fox misinformed the Hollywood Reporter that I apologized afterwards. Unfortunately the Hollywood Reporter didn’t ask for specifics, or even ask me about it — and I am not hard to find. (Dude, that’s an automatic F in Journalism 101.)
And Ricks’ thoughts on being cut off the air at FOX:
I was surprised that they cut me off instead of doing the manly thing and riding to the sound of the guns. Whattabunchawimps. It reminded me of something that Col. Nathan R. Jessup once said. Or, as a defense reporter commented to me yesterday, “The story is not about Benghazi, it’s about how Fox can’t tolerate criticism.”
Ricks, in his blog post on this, published a few of the many e-mails he got from FOXbots.
image on flickr by Philip Weiss
25 Comments
Ironically, Tom skipped over our most penetrating questions at the Salon, but, it’s awesome to see what he’s done on faux spew…! ;-)
Great post, ET…! *g*
He did that, CT. I like the way he skipped over one of my queries:
ET
TR:
*heh* Surprise…! ;-)
Life’s little ironies!
He lasted longer at FDL than he did on FOX, that’s for sure.
I do admire Tom Ricks, because he does realize how futile our current Foreign Policy is…!
From my perspective both in terms of my profession and in terms of where I engage in my profession. He’s a marginally, very marginally, less crazed war monger than most of the American commentariat. I suppose there’s a certain enjoyment in watching the vipers fanging one another but it too it is pretty marginal. A far more interesting (and appalling) question to me is how on earth did an out and out militarist shill like Ricks attain the position he has.
mfi
A case in point is this video of him giving a talk to a room mostly full of colonels, generals, admirals and retired such currently employed in the defense industries, and the rest of the attendees being reporters sucking up to that paradigm.
He might be a ‘Militarist Shill’, but, he does in fact realize we’re on the wrong path, now, will it be a ‘wake up’ call, one can only hope so…!
I do recall him skipping over my ‘revolving door’ question of pentagon brass to K street Defense Lobbyists…! 8-(
It is now up to about 100,000 in Tahrir Square.
The level of militarisation, and of militarism, in American society is horrific. A further case in point is how so many of the denizens of FDL rush to say “
Pleasepleaseletmebethefirsttolickyouranusreallyclean” oops sorry I meant “Thank you for your service” whenever they become aware that somebody here is serving or has served in the armed forces. I’ve always found that more than slightly disgusting. I suppose it’s a side-effect of the fact that by-and-large nice middle class liberal folks don’t take up careers in the military anymore but nevertheless – yuck.(An even worse side effect of the fact that by-and-large nice middle class liberal folks don’t take up careers in the military is that when it comes to countering militarist shills and the propaganda they spout “liberals” and “progressives” are at a severe disadvantage because lacking even the most basic factual information or the wherewithal to interpret it they make ridiculous mistakes and are thus easily discounted. But perhaps that’s a discussion for another time).
mfi
You mean you go with the militarist shills you have and not with the militarist shills you want to have? :-)
mfi
That’s not very many.
mfi
This past Veteran’s Day I played in five concerts that were keyed to “Salute Those Who Serve” or have served. As a veteran, I got that “Thank you, blah, blah, for your service!” tons of times.
My usual response is something like “I burned my class A’s in a burn barrel the week after I got out, grew my hair down to my asshole, and volunteered for the Quakers, where I smuggled dozens of draft resistors out on bail into British Columbia. That was my real service. Still want to thank me?” Or variations on that riff.
*heh* Basically, bro…! 8-P
*heh* You sly little devil…! ;-)
It’s a good riff to have :-). I’d forgotten about the CO smuggling thanks for reminding me. Sensible practical resistance engaged in by someone who had actually been in the army instead of uselessly sloganising.
mfi
I knew you’d enjoy the reference :-).
mfi
His complaint is that the reporter refused to take his bait. lol..
MFI, the answer is found in your question. Foreign Policy is also part of the MIC. Ricks wants to be an MSNBC media star, looks like to me.
No doubt, shek, at least one ‘green room’…! ;-)
The sad thing is that it wasn’t always that way. But the corporations that make big profits from the Pentagon push this as a way to make questioning anything about the military taboo — aka “unamerican”.
The Pentagon and the war profiteers that sustain it are the only acceptable forms of government spending in conservative quarters, driven as they are by the dictates of the corporate-bigot alliance called “the Southern Strategy”, whose game plan is to get white working-class and middle-class to vote against their own economic best interests by voting to cut rich entities’ taxes and thus spending on social programs that might benefit nonwhites.
The sacred/taboo nature of Pentagon spending is why a lot of social programs have been shifted in part under the Pentagon’s umbrella — that’s part of why the VA has a health care system that provides the best care in the nation and the DoD is a heavy investor in solar and wind power.
The “thank you for your service” comments, I feel, mainly eminate from “nice middle class liberal” guilt vis the treatment of returning Vets from Viet Nam, who were routinely treated badly. Although one can make a case for calling any returning Vet a “baby killer,” etc, one can also acknowledge that most Viet Nam vets were drafted and had few choices to avoid service (yes, some did, but for poor, ill-educated citizens, the notion of draft dodging probably wasn’t a real option).
That said, the 1%, via the corp-owned media, has worked overtime on ladling on the GUILT about the treatment of returning Viet Nam vets, and I do personally get annoyed (for what it’s worth) with the almost constant *harping* on it by the media. Enough already! But it’s been a good tool for manipulating the populace in various ways, that’s for sure.
These days with a totally voluntary military, it’s a bit different, but not all that much. Unemployment, as we all know, is really high, plus even people with full-time jobs are struggling to survive. I know quite a few younger men & women who really didn’t want to enlist, but they also felt like eating (not exaggerating in some cases).
So, yeah, it may seem obnoxious, naive, stupid, ass-licking or whatever to thank Vets for their service. I have very mixed emotions about it myself and have few illusions about what this Country is and what our goals are – at least what the 1% goals are. That said, most younger people who enlist are just cannon fodder, usually with few other options. Personally I have some sympathy for them. Just saying…
The talking heads guarding the inhabitants of Bullsh*t Mountain from rejoining the world of the sane just won’t budge an inch will they? Fox News is a propaganda machine which dumbs down America by the day through disinformation and their slanted agendas. See their anchors spewing forth feces from their mouths in my visual homage to the network on my artist’s blog at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-fox-news-scylla-guardian-of-bullsht.html
Ricks has been a cheerleader for the wars and Petraeus. But he was on the FDL Book interview, so that is something. His comments are also keeping attention on Benghazi, not the way Team Benghazi wants.
There is no shortage of embedded Petraeus Apologists. Actually, Howard Kurtz is still in bed with Petraeus. And Howard is a liar.
P4 was not wounded in combat. He has a chestful of fruit salad but he does not have a Purple Heart. His wars have been disasters. He may have been using Jill Kelley for a no-bid Clean Coal deal with the President of South Korea. And P4 and the JCS gave Kelley a Medal in an actual ceremony. Bad judgement or Quid pro Quo?
Petraeus, gave the Talking Points to Susan Rice. Then the Benghazi-gate trap was sprung.
Our next Secretary of State, Susan Rice!
http://www.blackagendareport.com/content/second-wave-genocide-looms-congo-susan-rice-point
“… The main player in suppressing information on Congo’s neighbors’ role in the ongoing genocide, is U.S. ambassador to the UN Susan Rice.
Rice has fought a two-front battle to protect Washington’s murderous clients, delaying publication of a UN Group of Experts report on Washington’s clients’ depredations in Congo, and at the same time subverting efforts within the State Department to rein in Uganda and Rwanda. Last week, Rice blocked the UN Security Council from explicitly demanding that Rwanda immediately cease providing support to M23 rebels who vowed to march all the way to Kinshasa, the Congolese capital.
Susan Rice has abetted the Congo genocide for much of her political career. Appointed to President Bill Clinton’s National Security Council in 1993, at age 28, she rose to assistant secretary of state for African affairs in 1997 as Rwanda and Uganda were swarming across the eastern Congo, seizing control of mineral resources amid a sea of blood. She is known to be personally close to Rwanda’s minority Tutsi leadership, including President Paul Kagame, a ruthless soldier trained at the U.S. Army’s Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and mentored by Ugandan strongman (and Reagan administration favorite) Yoweri Museveni, who is believed to have pioneered the use of child soldiers in modern African conflicts.
“Rice said not a word about ethnic cleansing and racial pogroms against black Libyans and sub-Saharan African migrant workers.””
Ricks: ““I think that Benghazi generally was hyped, by this network especially,” Ricks said. “And now that the campaign is over, I think [Sen. John McCain] is backing off a little bit. They’re not going to stop Susan Rice from being Secretary of State.”