text:
This study was originally published in the New York Times, April 20, 2008
In the summer of 2005, the Bush administration confronted a fresh wave of criticism over Guantánamo Bay. The detention center had just been branded "the gulag of our times" by Amnesty International, there were new allegations of abuse from United Nations human rights experts and calls were mounting for its closure.
The administration's communications experts responded swiftly. Early one Friday morning, they put a group of retired military officers on one of the jets normally used by Vice President Dick Cheney and flew them to Cuba for a carefully orchestrated tour of Guantánamo.
To the public, these men are members of a familiar fraternity, presented tens of thousands of times on television and radio as "military analysts" whose long service has equipped them to give authoritative and unfettered judgments about the most pressing issues of the post-Sept. 11 world.
Hidden behind that appearance of objectivity, though, is a Pentagon information apparatus that has used those analysts in a campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration's wartime performance, an examination by The New York Times has found.
The effort, which began with the buildup to the Iraq war and continues to this day, has sought to exploit ideological and military allegiances, and also a powerful financial dynamic: Most of the analysts have ties to military contractors vested in the very war policies they are asked to assess on air.
Those business relationships are hardly ever disclosed to the viewers, and sometimes not even to the networks themselves. But collectively, the men on the plane and several dozen other military analysts represent more than 150 military contractors either as lobbyists, senior executives, board members or consultants. The companies include defense heavyweights, but also scores of smaller companies, all part of a vast assemblage of contractors scrambling for hundreds of billions in military business generated by the administration's war on terror. It is a furious competition, one in which inside information and easy access to senior officials are highly prized.
Records and interviews show how the Bush administration has used its control over access and information in an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks.
Analysts have been wooed in hundreds of private briefings with senior military leaders, including officials with significant influence over contracting and budget matters, records show. They have been taken on tours of Iraq and given access to classified intelligence. They have been briefed by officials from the White House, State Department and Justice Department, including Mr. Cheney, Alberto R. Gonzales and Stephen J. Hadley.
In turn, members of this group have echoed administration talking points, sometimes even when they suspected the information was false or inflated. Some analysts acknowledge they suppressed doubts because they feared jeopardizing their access.
A few expressed regret for participating in what they regarded as an effort to dupe the American public with propaganda dressed as independent military analysis.
"It was them saying, 'We need to stick our hands up your back and move your mouth for you,' " Robert S. Bevelacqua, a retired Green Beret and former Fox News analyst, said.
Kenneth Allard, a former NBC military analyst who has taught information warfare at the National Defense University, said the campaign amounted to a sophisticated information operation. "This was a coherent, active policy," he said.
As conditions in Iraq deteriorated, Mr. Allard recalled, he saw a yawning gap between what analysts were told in private briefings and what subsequent inquiries and books later revealed.
"Night and day," Mr. Allard said, "I felt we'd been hosed."
The Pentagon defended its relationship with military analysts, saying they had been given only factual information about the war. "The intent and purpose of this is nothing other than an earnest attempt to inform the American people," Bryan Whitman, a Pentagon spokesman, said.
It was, Mr. Whitman added, "a bit incredible" to think retired military officers could be "wound up" and turned into "puppets of the Defense Department."
Many analysts strongly denied that they had either been co-opted or had allowed outside business interests to affect their on-air comments, and some have used their platforms to criticize the conduct of the war. Several, like Jeffrey D. McCausland, a CBS military analyst and defense industry lobbyist, said they kept their networks informed of their outside work and recused themselves from coverage that touched on business interests.
"I'm not here representing the administration," Dr. McCausland said.
Some network officials, meanwhile, acknowledged only a limited understanding of their analysts' interactions with the administration. They said that while they were sensitive to potential conflicts of interest, they did not hold their analysts to the same ethical standards as their news employees regarding outside financial interests. The onus is on their analysts to disclose conflicts, they said. And whatever the contributions of military analysts, they also noted the many network journalists who have covered the war for years in all its complexity.
Five years into the Iraq war, most details of the architecture and execution of the Pentagon's campaign have never been disclosed. But The Times successfully sued the Defense Department to gain access to 8,000 pages of e-mail messages, transcripts and records describing years of private briefings, trips to Iraq and Guantánamo and an extensive Pentagon talking points operation.
These records reveal a symbiotic relationship where the usual dividing lines between government and journalism have been obliterated.
Internal Pentagon documents repeatedly refer to the military analysts as "message force multipliers" or "surrogates" who could be counted on to deliver administration "themes and messages" to millions of Americans "in the form of their own opinions."
Though many analysts are paid network consultants, making $500 to $1,000 per appearance, in Pentagon meetings they sometimes spoke as if they were operating behind enemy lines, interviews and transcripts show. Some offered the Pentagon tips on how to outmaneuver the networks, or as one analyst put it to Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, "the Chris Matthewses and the Wolf Blitzers of the world." Some warned of planned stories or sent the Pentagon copies of their correspondence with network news executives. Many — although certainly not all — faithfully echoed talking points intended to counter critics.
"Good work," Thomas G. McInerney, a retired Air Force general, consultant and Fox News analyst, wrote to the Pentagon after receiving fresh talking points in late 2006. "We will use it."
Again and again, records show, the administration has enlisted analysts as a rapid reaction force to rebut what it viewed as critical news coverage, some of it by the networks' own Pentagon correspondents. For example, when news articles revealed that troops in Iraq were dying because of inadequate body armor, a senior Pentagon official wrote to his colleagues: "I think our analysts — properly armed — can push back in that arena."
The documents released by the Pentagon do not show any quid pro quo between commentary and contracts. But some analysts said they had used the special access as a marketing and networking opportunity or as a window into future business possibilities.
John C. Garrett is a retired Marine colonel and unpaid analyst for Fox News TV and radio. He is also a lobbyist at Patton Boggs who helps firms win Pentagon contracts, including in Iraq. In promotional materials, he states that as a military analyst he "is privy to weekly access and briefings with the secretary of defense, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other high level policy makers in the administration." One client told investors that Mr. Garrett's special access and decades of experience helped him "to know in advance — and in detail — how best to meet the needs" of the Defense Department and other agencies.
In interviews Mr. Garrett said there was an inevitable overlap between his dual roles. He said he had gotten "information you just otherwise would not get," from the briefings and three Pentagon-sponsored trips to Iraq. He also acknowledged using this access and information to identify opportunities for clients. "You can't help but look for that," he said, adding, "If you know a capability that would fill a niche or need, you try to fill it. "That's good for everybody."
At the same time, in e-mail messages to the Pentagon, Mr. Garrett displayed an eagerness to be supportive with his television and radio commentary. "Please let me know if you have any specific points you want covered or that you would prefer to downplay," he wrote in January 2007, before President Bush went on TV to describe the surge strategy in Iraq.
Conversely, the administration has demonstrated that there is a price for sustained criticism, many analysts said. "You'll lose all access," Dr. McCausland said.
With a majority of Americans calling the war a mistake despite all administration attempts to sway public opinion, the Pentagon has focused in the last couple of years on cultivating in particular military analysts frequently seen and heard in conservative news outlets, records and interviews show.
Some of these analysts were on the mission to Cuba on June 24, 2005 — the first of six such Guantánamo trips — which was designed to mobilize analysts against the growing perception of Guantánamo as an international symbol of inhumane treatment. On the flight to Cuba, for much of the day at Guantánamo and on the flight home that night, Pentagon officials briefed the 10 or so analysts on their key messages — how much had been spent improving the facility, the abuse endured by guards, the extensive rights afforded detainees.
The results came quickly. The analysts went on TV and radio, decrying Amnesty International, criticizing calls to close the facility and asserting that all detainees were treated humanely.
"The impressions that you're getting from the media and from the various pronouncements being made by people who have not been here in my opinion are totally false," Donald W. Shepperd, a retired Air Force general, reported live on CNN by phone from Guantánamo that same afternoon.
The next morning, Montgomery Meigs, a retired Army general and NBC analyst, appeared on "Today." "There's been over $100 million of new construction," he reported. "The place is very professionally run."
Within days, transcripts of the analysts' appearances were circulated to senior White House and Pentagon officials, cited as evidence of progress in the battle for hearts and minds at home.
Charting the Campaign
By early 2002, detailed planning for a possible Iraq invasion was under way, yet an obstacle loomed. Many Americans, polls showed, were uneasy about invading a country with no clear connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. Pentagon and White House officials believed the military analysts could play a crucial role in helping overcome this resistance.
Torie Clarke, the former public relations executive who oversaw the Pentagon's dealings with the analysts as assistant secretary of defense for public affairs, had come to her job with distinct ideas about achieving what she called "information dominance." In a spin-saturated news culture, she argued, opinion is swayed most by voices perceived as authoritative and utterly independent.
And so even before Sept. 11, she built a system within the Pentagon to recruit "key influentials" — movers and shakers from all walks who with the proper ministrations might be counted on to generate support for Mr. Rumsfeld's priorities.
In the months after Sept. 11, as every network rushed to retain its own all-star squad of retired military officers, Ms. Clarke and her staff sensed a new opportunity. To Ms. Clarke's team, the military analysts were the ultimate "key influential" — authoritative, most of them decorated war heroes, all reaching mass audiences.
The analysts, they noticed, often got more airtime than network reporters, and they were not merely explaining the capabilities of Apache helicopters. They were framing how viewers ought to interpret events. What is more, while the analysts were in the news media, they were not of the news media. They were military men, many of them ideologically in sync with the administration's neoconservative brain trust, many of them important players in a military industry anticipating large budget increases to pay for an Iraq war.
Even analysts with no defense industry ties, and no fondness for the administration, were reluctant to be critical of military leaders, many of whom were friends. "It is very hard for me to criticize the United States Army," said William L. Nash, a retired Army general and ABC analyst. "It is my life."
Other administrations had made sporadic, small-scale attempts to build relationships with the occasional military analyst. But these were trifling compared with what Ms. Clarke's team had in mind. Don Meyer, an aide to Ms. Clarke, said a strategic decision was made in 2002 to make the analysts the main focus of the public relations push to construct a case for war. Journalists were secondary. "We didn't want to rely on them to be our primary vehicle to get information out," Mr. Meyer said.
The Pentagon's regular press office would be kept separate from the military analysts. The analysts would instead be catered to by a small group of political appointees, with the point person being Brent T. Krueger, another senior aide to Ms. Clarke. The decision recalled other administration tactics that subverted traditional journalism. Federal agencies, for example, have paid columnists to write favorably about the administration. They have distributed to local TV stations hundreds of fake news segments with fawning accounts of administration accomplishments. The Pentagon itself has made covert payments to Iraqi newspapers to publish coalition propaganda.
Rather than complain about the "media filter," each of these techniques simply converted the filter into an amplifier. This time, Mr. Krueger said, the military analysts would in effect be "writing the op-ed" for the war.
Assembling the Team
From the start, interviews show, the White House took a keen interest in which analysts had been identified by the Pentagon, requesting lists of potential recruits, and suggesting names. Ms. Clarke's team wrote summaries describing their backgrounds, business affiliations and where they stood on the war.
"Rumsfeld ultimately cleared off on all invitees," said Mr. Krueger, who left the Pentagon in 2004. (Through a spokesman, Mr. Rumsfeld declined to comment for this article.)
Over time, the Pentagon recruited more than 75 retired officers, although some participated only briefly or sporadically. The largest contingent was affiliated with Fox News, followed by NBC and CNN, the other networks with 24-hour cable outlets. But analysts from CBS and ABC were included, too. Some recruits, though not on any network payroll, were influential in other ways — either because they were sought out by radio hosts, or because they often published op-ed articles or were quoted in magazines, Web sites and newspapers. At least nine of them have written op-ed articles for The Times.
The group was heavily represented by men involved in the business of helping companies win military contracts. Several held senior positions with contractors that gave them direct responsibility for winning new Pentagon business. James Marks, a retired Army general and analyst for CNN from 2004 to 2007, pursued military and intelligence contracts as a senior executive with McNeil Technologies. Still others held board positions with military firms that gave them responsibility for government business. General McInerney, the Fox analyst, for example, sits on the boards of several military contractors, including Nortel Government Solutions, a supplier of communication networks.
Several were defense industry lobbyists, such as Dr. McCausland, who works at Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney, a major lobbying firm where he is director of a national security team that represents several military contractors. "We offer clients access to key decision makers," Dr. McCausland's team promised on the firm's Web site.
Dr. McCausland was not the only analyst making this pledge. Another was Joseph W. Ralston, a retired Air Force general. Soon after signing on with CBS, General Ralston was named vice chairman of the Cohen Group, a consulting firm headed by a former defense secretary, William Cohen, himself now a "world affairs" analyst for CNN. "The Cohen Group knows that getting to 'yes' in the aerospace and defense market — whether in the United States or abroad — requires that companies have a thorough, up-to-date understanding of the thinking of government decision makers," the company tells prospective clients on its Web site.
There were also ideological ties.
Two of NBC's most prominent analysts, Barry R. McCaffrey and the late Wayne A. Downing, were on the advisory board of the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, an advocacy group created with White House encouragement in 2002 to help make the case for ousting Saddam Hussein. Both men also had their own consulting firms and sat on the boards of major military contractors.
Many also shared with Mr. Bush's national security team a belief that pessimistic war coverage broke the nation's will to win in Vietnam, and there was a mutual resolve not to let that happen with this war.
This was a major theme, for example, with Paul E. Vallely, a Fox News analyst from 2001 to 2007. A retired Army general who had specialized in psychological warfare, Mr. Vallely co-authored a paper in 1980 that accused American news organizations of failing to defend the nation from "enemy" propaganda during Vietnam.
"We lost the war — not because we were outfought, but because we were out Psyoped," he wrote. He urged a radically new approach to psychological operations in future wars — taking aim at not just foreign adversaries but domestic audiences, too. He called his approach "MindWar" — using network TV and radio to "strengthen our national will to victory."
The Selling of the War
From their earliest sessions with the military analysts, Mr. Rumsfeld and his aides spoke as if they were all part of the same team.
In interviews, participants described a powerfully seductive environment — the uniformed escorts to Mr. Rumsfeld's private conference room, the best government china laid out, the embossed name cards, the blizzard of PowerPoints, the solicitations of advice and counsel, the appeals to duty and country, the warm thank you notes from the secretary himself.
"Oh, you have no idea," Mr. Allard said, describing the effect. "You're back. They listen to you. They listen to what you say on TV." It was, he said, "psyops on steroids" — a nuanced exercise in influence through flattery and proximity. "It's not like it's, 'We'll pay you $500 to get our story out,' " he said. "It's more subtle."
The access came with a condition. Participants were instructed not to quote their briefers directly or otherwise describe their contacts with the Pentagon.
In the fall and winter leading up to the invasion, the Pentagon armed its analysts with talking points portraying Iraq as an urgent threat. The basic case became a familiar mantra: Iraq possessed chemical and biological weapons, was developing nuclear weapons, and might one day slip some to Al Qaeda; an invasion would be a relatively quick and inexpensive "war of liberation."
At the Pentagon, members of Ms. Clarke's staff marveled at the way the analysts seamlessly incorporated material from talking points and briefings as if it was their own.
"You could see that they were messaging," Mr. Krueger said. "You could see they were taking verbatim what the secretary was saying or what the technical specialists were saying. And they were saying it over and over and over." Some days, he added, "We were able to click on every single station and every one of our folks were up there delivering our message. You'd look at them and say, 'This is working.' "
On April 12, 2003, with major combat almost over, Mr. Rumsfeld drafted a memorandum to Ms. Clarke. "Let's think about having some of the folks who did such a good job as talking heads in after this thing is over," he wrote.
By summer, though, the first signs of the insurgency had emerged. Reports from journalists based in Baghdad were increasingly suffused with the imagery of mayhem.
The Pentagon did not have to search far for a counterweight.
It was time, an internal Pentagon strategy memorandum urged, to "re-energize surrogates and message-force multipliers," starting with the military analysts.
The memorandum led to a proposal to take analysts on a tour of Iraq in September 2003, timed to help overcome the sticker shock from Mr. Bush's request for $87 billion in emergency war financing.
The group included four analysts from Fox News, one each from CNN and ABC, and several research-group luminaries whose opinion articles appear regularly in the nation's op-ed pages.
The trip invitation promised a look at "the real situation on the ground in Iraq."
The situation, as described in scores of books, was deteriorating. L. Paul Bremer III, then the American viceroy in Iraq, wrote in his memoir, "My Year in Iraq," that he had privately warned the White House that the United States had "about half the number of soldiers we needed here."
"We're up against a growing and sophisticated threat," Mr. Bremer recalled telling the president during a private White House dinner.
That dinner took place on Sept. 24, while the analysts were touring Iraq.
Yet these harsh realities were elided, or flatly contradicted, during the official presentations for the analysts, records show. The itinerary, scripted to the minute, featured brief visits to a model school, a few refurbished government buildings, a center for women's rights, a mass grave and even the gardens of Babylon.
Mostly the analysts attended briefings. These sessions, records show, spooled out an alternative narrative, depicting an Iraq bursting with political and economic energy, its security forces blossoming. On the crucial question of troop levels, the briefings echoed the White House line: No reinforcements were needed. The "growing and sophisticated threat" described by Mr. Bremer was instead depicted as degraded, isolated and on the run.
"We're winning," a briefing document proclaimed.
One trip participant, General Nash of ABC, said some briefings were so clearly "artificial" that he joked to another group member that they were on "the George Romney memorial trip to Iraq," a reference to Mr. Romney's infamous claim that American officials had "brainwashed" him into supporting the Vietnam War during a tour there in 1965, while he was governor of Michigan.
But if the trip pounded the message of progress, it also represented a business opportunity: direct access to the most senior civilian and military leaders in Iraq and Kuwait, including many with a say in how the president's $87 billion would be spent. It also was a chance to gather inside information about the most pressing needs confronting the American mission: the acute shortages of "up-armored" Humvees; the billions to be spent building military bases; the urgent need for interpreters; and the ambitious plans to train Iraq's security forces.
Information and access of this nature had undeniable value for trip participants like William V. Cowan and Carlton A. Sherwood.
Mr. Cowan, a Fox analyst and retired Marine colonel, was the chief executive of a new military firm, the wvc3 Group. Mr. Sherwood was its executive vice president. At the time, the company was seeking contracts worth tens of millions to supply body armor and counterintelligence services in Iraq. In addition, wvc3 Group had a written agreement to use its influence and connections to help tribal leaders in Al Anbar Province win reconstruction contracts from the coalition.
"Those sheiks wanted access to the C.P.A.," Mr. Cowan recalled in an interview, referring to the Coalition Provisional Authority.
Mr. Cowan said he pleaded their cause during the trip. "I tried to push hard with some of Bremer's people to engage these people of Al Anbar," he said.
Back in Washington, Pentagon officials kept a nervous eye on how the trip translated on the airwaves. Uncomfortable facts had bubbled up during the trip. One briefer, for example, mentioned that the Army was resorting to packing inadequately armored Humvees with sandbags and Kevlar blankets. Descriptions of the Iraqi security forces were withering. "They can't shoot, but then again, they don't," one officer told them, according to one participant's notes.
"I saw immediately in 2003 that things were going south," General Vallely, one of the Fox analysts on the trip, recalled in an interview with The Times.
The Pentagon, though, need not have worried.
"You can't believe the progress," General Vallely told Alan Colmes of Fox News upon his return. He predicted the insurgency would be "down to a few numbers" within months.
"We could not be more excited, more pleased," Mr. Cowan told Greta Van Susteren of Fox News. There was barely a word about armor shortages or corrupt Iraqi security forces. And on the key strategic question of the moment — whether to send more troops — the analysts were unanimous.
"I am so much against adding more troops," General Shepperd said on CNN.
Access and Influence
Inside the Pentagon and at the White House, the trip was viewed as a masterpiece in the management of perceptions, not least because it gave fuel to complaints that "mainstream" journalists were ignoring the good news in Iraq.
"We're hitting a home run on this trip," a senior Pentagon official wrote in an e-mail message to Richard B. Myers and Peter Pace, then chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Its success only intensified the Pentagon's campaign. The pace of briefings accelerated. More trips were organized. Eventually the effort involved officials from Washington to Baghdad to Kabul to Guantánamo and back to Tampa, Fla., the headquarters of United States Central Command.
The scale reflected strong support from the top. When officials in Iraq were slow to organize another trip for analysts, a Pentagon official fired off an e-mail message warning that the trips "have the highest levels of visibility" at the White House and urging them to get moving before Lawrence Di Rita, one of Mr. Rumsfeld's closest aides, "picks up the phone and starts calling the 4-stars."
Mr. Di Rita, no longer at the Defense Department, said in an interview that a "conscious decision" was made to rely on the military analysts to counteract "the increasingly negative view of the war" coming from journalists in Iraq. The analysts, he said, generally had "a more supportive view" of the administration and the war, and the combination of their TV platforms and military cachet made them ideal for rebutting critical coverage of issues like troop morale, treatment of detainees, inadequate equipment or poorly trained Iraqi security forces. "On those issues, they were more likely to be seen as credible spokesmen," he said.
For analysts with military industry ties, the attention brought access to a widening circle of influential officials beyond the contacts they had accumulated over the course of their careers.
Charles T. Nash, a Fox military analyst and retired Navy captain, is a consultant who helps small companies break into the military market. Suddenly, he had entree to a host of senior military leaders, many of whom he had never met. It was, he said, like being embedded with the Pentagon leadership. "You start to recognize what's most important to them," he said, adding, "There's nothing like seeing stuff firsthand."
Some Pentagon officials said they were well aware that some analysts viewed their special access as a business advantage. "Of course we realized that," Mr. Krueger said. "We weren't naïve about that."
They also understood the financial relationship between the networks and their analysts. Many analysts were being paid by the "hit," the number of times they appeared on TV. The more an analyst could boast of fresh inside information from high-level Pentagon "sources," the more hits he could expect. The more hits, the greater his potential influence in the military marketplace, where several analysts prominently advertised their network roles.
"They have taken lobbying and the search for contracts to a far higher level," Mr. Krueger said. "This has been highly honed."
Mr. Di Rita, though, said it never occurred to him that analysts might use their access to curry favor. Nor, he said, did the Pentagon try to exploit this dynamic. "That's not something that ever crossed my mind," he said. In any event, he argued, the analysts and the networks were the ones responsible for any ethical complications. "We assume they know where the lines are," he said.
The analysts met personally with Mr. Rumsfeld at least 18 times, records show, but that was just the beginning. They had dozens more sessions with the most senior members of his brain trust and access to officials responsible for managing the billions being spent in Iraq. Other groups of "key influentials" had meetings, but not nearly as often as the analysts.
An internal memorandum in 2005 helped explain why. The memorandum, written by a Pentagon official who had accompanied analysts to Iraq, said that based on her observations during the trip, the analysts "are having a greater impact" on network coverage of the military. "They have now become the go-to guys not only on breaking stories, but they influence the views on issues," she wrote.
Other branches of the administration also began to make use of the analysts. Mr. Gonzales, then the attorney general, met with them soon after news leaked that the government was wiretapping terrorism suspects in the United States without warrants, Pentagon records show. When David H. Petraeus was appointed the commanding general in Iraq in January 2007, one of his early acts was to meet with the analysts.
"We knew we had extraordinary access," said Timur J. Eads, a retired Army lieutenant colonel and Fox analyst who is vice president of government relations for Blackbird Technologies, a fast-growing military contractor.
Like several other analysts, Mr. Eads said he had at times held his tongue on television for fear that "some four-star could call up and say, 'Kill that contract.' " For example, he believed Pentagon officials misled the analysts about the progress of Iraq's security forces. "I know a snow job when I see one," he said. He did not share this on TV.
"Human nature," he explained, though he noted other instances when he was critical.
Some analysts said that even before the war started, they privately had questions about the justification for the invasion, but were careful not to express them on air.
Mr. Bevelacqua, then a Fox analyst, was among those invited to a briefing in early 2003 about Iraq's purported stockpiles of illicit weapons. He recalled asking the briefer whether the United States had "smoking gun" proof.
" 'We don't have any hard evidence,' " Mr. Bevelacqua recalled the briefer replying. He said he and other analysts were alarmed by this concession. "We are looking at ourselves saying, 'What are we doing?' "
Another analyst, Robert L. Maginnis, a retired Army lieutenant colonel who works in the Pentagon for a military contractor, attended the same briefing and recalled feeling "very disappointed" after being shown satellite photographs purporting to show bunkers associated with a hidden weapons program. Mr. Maginnis said he concluded that the analysts were being "manipulated" to convey a false sense of certainty about the evidence of the weapons. Yet he and Mr. Bevelacqua and the other analysts who attended the briefing did not share any misgivings with the American public.
Mr. Bevelacqua and another Fox analyst, Mr. Cowan, had formed the wvc3 Group, and hoped to win military and national security contracts.
"There's no way I was going to go down that road and get completely torn apart," Mr. Bevelacqua said. "You're talking about fighting a huge machine."
Some e-mail messages between the Pentagon and the analysts reveal an implicit trade of privileged access for favorable coverage. Robert H. Scales Jr., a retired Army general and analyst for Fox News and National Public Radio whose consulting company advises several military firms on weapons and tactics used in Iraq, wanted the Pentagon to approve high-level briefings for him inside Iraq in 2006.
"Recall the stuff I did after my last visit," he wrote. "I will do the same this time."
Pentagon Keeps Tabs
As it happened, the analysts' news media appearances were being closely monitored. The Pentagon paid a private contractor, Omnitec Solutions, hundreds of thousands of dollars to scour databases for any trace of the analysts, be it a segment on "The O'Reilly Factor" or an interview with The Daily Inter Lake in Montana, circulation 20,000.
Omnitec evaluated their appearances using the same tools as corporate branding experts. One report, assessing the impact of several trips to Iraq in 2005, offered example after example of analysts echoing Pentagon themes on all the networks.
"Commentary from all three Iraq trips was extremely positive over all," the report concluded.
In interviews, several analysts reacted with dismay when told they were described as reliable "surrogates" in Pentagon documents. And some asserted that their Pentagon sessions were, as David L. Grange, a retired Army general and CNN analyst put it, "just upfront information," while others pointed out, accurately, that they did not always agree with the administration or each other. "None of us drink the Kool-Aid," General Scales said.
Likewise, several also denied using their special access for business gain. "Not related at all," General Shepperd said, pointing out that many in the Pentagon held CNN "in the lowest esteem."
Still, even the mildest of criticism could draw a challenge. Several analysts told of fielding telephone calls from displeased defense officials only minutes after being on the air.
On Aug. 3, 2005, 14 marines died in Iraq. That day, Mr. Cowan, who said he had grown increasingly uncomfortable with the "twisted version of reality" being pushed on analysts in briefings, called the Pentagon to give "a heads-up" that some of his comments on Fox "may not all be friendly," Pentagon records show. Mr. Rumsfeld's senior aides quickly arranged a private briefing for him, yet when he told Bill O'Reilly that the United States was "not on a good glide path right now" in Iraq, the repercussions were swift.
Mr. Cowan said he was "precipitously fired from the analysts group" for this appearance. The Pentagon, he wrote in an e-mail message, "simply didn't like the fact that I wasn't carrying their water." The next day James T. Conway, then director of operations for the Joint Chiefs, presided over another conference call with analysts. He urged them, a transcript shows, not to let the marines' deaths further erode support for the war.
"The strategic target remains our population," General Conway said. "We can lose people day in and day out, but they're never going to beat our military. What they can and will do if they can is strip away our support. And you guys can help us not let that happen."
"General, I just made that point on the air," an analyst replied.
"Let's work it together, guys," General Conway urged.
The Generals' Revolt
The full dimensions of this mutual embrace were perhaps never clearer than in April 2006, after several of Mr. Rumsfeld's former generals — none of them network military analysts — went public with devastating critiques of his wartime performance. Some called for his resignation.
On Friday, April 14, with what came to be called the "Generals' Revolt" dominating headlines, Mr. Rumsfeld instructed aides to summon military analysts to a meeting with him early the next week, records show. When an aide urged a short delay to "give our big guys on the West Coast a little more time to buy a ticket and get here," Mr. Rumsfeld's office insisted that "the boss" wanted the meeting fast "for impact on the current story."
That same day, Pentagon officials helped two Fox analysts, General McInerney and General Vallely, write an opinion article for The Wall Street Journal defending Mr. Rumsfeld.
"Starting to write it now," General Vallely wrote to the Pentagon that afternoon. "Any input for the article," he added a little later, "will be much appreciated." Mr. Rumsfeld's office quickly forwarded talking points and statistics to rebut the notion of a spreading revolt.
"Vallely is going to use the numbers," a Pentagon official reported that afternoon.
The standard secrecy notwithstanding, plans for this session leaked, producing a front-page story in The Times that Sunday. In damage-control mode, Pentagon officials scrambled to present the meeting as routine and directed that communications with analysts be kept "very formal," records show. "This is very, very sensitive now," a Pentagon official warned subordinates.
On Tuesday, April 18, some 17 analysts assembled at the Pentagon with Mr. Rumsfeld and General Pace, then the chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
A transcript of that session, never before disclosed, shows a shared determination to marginalize war critics and revive public support for the war.
"I'm an old intel guy," said one analyst. (The transcript omits speakers' names.) "And I can sum all of this up, unfortunately, with one word. That is Psyops. Now most people may hear that and they think, 'Oh my God, they're trying to brainwash.' "
"What are you, some kind of a nut?" Mr. Rumsfeld cut in, drawing laughter. "You don't believe in the Constitution?"
There was little discussion about the actual criticism pouring forth from Mr. Rumsfeld's former generals. Analysts argued that opposition to the war was rooted in perceptions fed by the news media, not reality. The administration's overall war strategy, they counseled, was "brilliant" and "very successful."
"Frankly," one participant said, "from a military point of view, the penalty, 2,400 brave Americans whom we lost, 3,000 in an hour and 15 minutes, is relative."
An analyst said at another point: "This is a wider war. And whether we have democracy in Iraq or not, it doesn't mean a tinker's damn if we end up with the result we want, which is a regime over there that's not a threat to us."
"Yeah," Mr. Rumsfeld said, taking notes.
But winning or not, they bluntly warned, the administration was in grave political danger so long as most Americans viewed Iraq as a lost cause. "America hates a loser," one analyst said.
Much of the session was devoted to ways that Mr. Rumsfeld could reverse the "political tide." One analyst urged Mr. Rumsfeld to "just crush these people," and assured him that "most of the gentlemen at the table" would enthusiastically support him if he did.
"You are the leader," the analyst told Mr. Rumsfeld. "You are our guy."
At another point, an analyst made a suggestion: "In one of your speeches you ought to say, 'Everybody stop for a minute and imagine an Iraq ruled by Zarqawi.' And then you just go down the list and say, 'All right, we've got oil, money, sovereignty, access to the geographic center of gravity of the Middle East, blah, blah, blah.' If you can just paint a mental picture for Joe America to say, 'Oh my God, I can't imagine a world like that.' "
Even as they assured Mr. Rumsfeld that they stood ready to help in this public relations offensive, the analysts sought guidance on what they should cite as the next "milestone" that would, as one analyst put it, "keep the American people focused on the idea that we're moving forward to a positive end." They placed particular emphasis on the growing confrontation with Iran.
"When you said 'long war,' you changed the psyche of the American people to expect this to be a generational event," an analyst said. "And again, I'm not trying to tell you how to do your job..."
"Get in line," Mr. Rumsfeld interjected.
The meeting ended and Mr. Rumsfeld, appearing pleased and relaxed, took the entire group into a small study and showed off treasured keepsakes from his life, several analysts recalled.
Soon after, analysts hit the airwaves. The Omnitec monitoring reports, circulated to more than 80 officials, confirmed that analysts repeated many of the Pentagon's talking points: that Mr. Rumsfeld consulted "frequently and sufficiently" with his generals; that he was not "overly concerned" with the criticisms; that the meeting focused "on more important topics at hand," including the next milestone in Iraq, the formation of a new government.
Days later, Mr. Rumsfeld wrote a memorandum distilling their collective guidance into bullet points. Two were underlined:
"Focus on the Global War on Terror — not simply Iraq. The wider war — the long war."
"Link Iraq to Iran. Iran is the concern. If we fail in Iraq or Afghanistan, it will help Iran."
But if Mr. Rumsfeld found the session instructive, at least one participant, General Nash, the ABC analyst, was repulsed.
"I walked away from that session having total disrespect for my fellow commentators, with perhaps one or two exceptions," he said.
View From the Networks
Two weeks ago General Petraeus took time out from testifying before Congress about Iraq for a conference call with military analysts.
Mr. Garrett, the Fox analyst and Patton Boggs lobbyist, said he told General Petraeus during the call to "keep up the great work."
"Hey," Mr. Garrett said in an interview, "anything we can do to help."
For the moment, though, because of heavy election coverage and general war fatigue, military analysts are not getting nearly as much TV time, and the networks have trimmed their rosters of analysts. The conference call with General Petraeus, for example, produced little in the way of immediate coverage.
Still, almost weekly the Pentagon continues to conduct briefings with selected military analysts. Many analysts said network officials were only dimly aware of these interactions. The networks, they said, have little grasp of how often they meet with senior officials, or what is discussed.
"I don't think NBC was even aware we were participating," said Rick Francona, a longtime military analyst for the network.
Some networks publish biographies on their Web sites that describe their analysts' military backgrounds and, in some cases, give at least limited information about their business ties. But many analysts also said the networks asked few questions about their outside business interests, the nature of their work or the potential for that work to create conflicts of interest. "None of that ever happened," said Mr. Allard, an NBC analyst until 2006.
"The worst conflict of interest was no interest."
Mr. Allard and other analysts said their network handlers also raised no objections when the Defense Department began paying their commercial airfare for Pentagon-sponsored trips to Iraq — a clear ethical violation for most news organizations.
CBS News declined to comment on what it knew about its military analysts' business affiliations or what steps it took to guard against potential conflicts.
NBC News also declined to discuss its procedures for hiring and monitoring military analysts. The network issued a short statement: "We have clear policies in place to assure that the people who appear on our air have been appropriately vetted and that nothing in their profile would lead to even a perception of a conflict of interest."
Jeffrey W. Schneider, a spokesman for ABC, said that while the network's military consultants were not held to the same ethical rules as its full-time journalists, they were expected to keep the network informed about any outside business entanglements. "We make it clear to them we expect them to keep us closely apprised," he said.
A spokeswoman for Fox News said executives "refused to participate" in this article.
CNN requires its military analysts to disclose in writing all outside sources of income. But like the other networks, it does not provide its military analysts with the kind of written, specific ethical guidelines it gives its full-time employees for avoiding real or apparent conflicts of interest.
Yet even where controls exist, they have sometimes proven porous.
CNN, for example, said it was unaware for nearly three years that one of its main military analysts, General Marks, was deeply involved in the business of seeking government contracts, including contracts related to Iraq.
General Marks was hired by CNN in 2004, about the time he took a management position at McNeil Technologies, where his job was to pursue military and intelligence contracts. As required, General Marks disclosed that he received income from McNeil Technologies. But the disclosure form did not require him to describe what his job entailed, and CNN acknowledges it failed to do additional vetting.
"We did not ask Mr. Marks the follow-up questions we should have," CNN said in a written statement.
In an interview, General Marks said it was no secret at CNN that his job at McNeil Technologies was about winning contracts. "I mean, that's what McNeil does," he said.
CNN, however, said it did not know the nature of McNeil's military business or what General Marks did for the company. If he was bidding on Pentagon contracts, CNN said, that should have disqualified him from being a military analyst for the network. But in the summer and fall of 2006, even as he was regularly asked to comment on conditions in Iraq, General Marks was working intensively on bidding for a $4.6 billion contract to provide thousands of translators to United States forces in Iraq. In fact, General Marks was made president of the McNeil spin-off that won the huge contract in December 2006.
General Marks said his work on the contract did not affect his commentary on CNN. "I've got zero challenge separating myself from a business interest," he said.
But CNN said it had no idea about his role in the contract until July 2007, when it reviewed his most recent disclosure form, submitted months earlier, and finally made inquiries about his new job.
"We saw the extent of his dealings and determined at that time we should end our relationship with him," CNN said.


text:
Only stray cats have the courage to roam the streets of this part of Syria's largest city. As felines freely pick their way through rubble and garbage, human beings dart from corner to corner, anxious bands of rebel fighters dashing between the bullets of regime snipers.
The neighborhood is called Bustan al-Basha and used to be the place a lot of Aleppo's citizens would bring their cars for repair. It was a mixed Christian-Sunni working class district, bordering the Kurdish district of Sheikh Maksoud. That is in e the past tense because, of the thousands of residents who once lived here, only three remain. The trio live on Rawand Street, which is in rebel hands. The street behind them belongs to the regime. Marie, a Christian Armenian, is retired kindergarten teacher; gray-haired Abdel-Latif is a retired civil servant; and cherubic young Abdel-Maten is a baker who hasn't been to his workplace for months even though it is less than two kilometers away because it is in Midan, a neighborhood under regime control. "I've been living here for 20 years," says Marie as she peeks out from her balcony, wiping her soapy hands on a dishcloth. "I'm still here because where am I going to go? This is my home. We are counting on God and staying, but you know, honestly, it's like I went to bed one night and the next morning everyone was gone. When and how they left, I don't know. It happened very suddenly."
(MORE: Syria's Body County: Meet the Exile Tracking the Death Toll)
Syria's grinding civil war swept into its largest city in late July. A proud and ancient cosmopolis, Aleppo is home to more than two million of Syria's 23 million people but it has now been been crudely carved into pro- and anti-regime pockets, the edges of which occasionally change hands. It is the deadliest sort of stalemate, with international diplomacy struggling to find a solution as the government of President Bashar Assad pursues a course of survival-via-atrocity; and the Syrian opposition in exile once again changes leadership in another attempt to weave its disparate ideological and military strands together. The grinding war of attrition has turned parts of Aleppo like Bustan al-Basha into wastelands.
The street warfare isn't winning the rebels any more friends. The urbane Aleppans have never really warmed to the opposition fighers, most of whom come from religiously conservative Sunni Muslim small-towns–and there is growing concern that the rebels are turning more sectarian. The rebels know they're not really welcome. "The Aleppans here, all of them, are loyal to the criminal Bashar, they inform on us, they tell the regime where we are, where we go, what we do, even now," says Abu Sadek, a defector from Assad's military now with Liwa Suqooral-Sha'ba, one of the three rebel units in Bustan al-Basha. "If God wasn't with us, we would have been wiped out a long time ago."
Assad's assault has certainly been ferocious. Many of Bustan al-Basha's four- and five-storey residential buildings have been partially sliced open, their concrete floors pancaked atop each other, their contents—dining tables, children's toys, washing machines—spewed into dusty mounds onto the streets below. Apart from the gentle sound of water gushing from burst pipes, there's a heavy silence here, punctured by sporadic sniper fire, the occasional roar of a warplane overhead unleashing its payload in another part of Aleppo, or the more frequent hair-raising whistle of an incoming mortar. Shorn power lines dangle over the streams of water cascading through the streets that have flooded many basements. The danger of electrocution would be high if the neighborhood had power, but it hasn't had that since armed rebels rumbled in from Aleppo's countryside this summer, intent on swiftly wresting Aleppo from the regime's firm grip.
That of course has not happened. Instead, the rebels have set up camp in abandoned apartments, stealing electricity from a spot about a kilometer away, and sharing it with the neighborhood's three remaining residents. Former residents who return briefly to check on their properties are not always treated as warmly. They are asked for ID and paperwork to prove that they lived in thearea. Some rebels say it's to guard against looting. Others have different concerns. "Some of these people toss electronic taggers at our bases that notify warplanes of our location," says one young rebel, explaining why the rebels distrust returning residents. He hadn't seen the devices, or had any proof, but was certain it was true.
(MORE: Syria Opposition Wins Western Backing)
On a recent morning, a young man in a thick gray sweater and tight shiny gray dress pants knocked on an apartment that is now the headquarters of Liwa Suqoor al-Sha'ba. He was accompanied by several armed rebels from the Grandsons of Hamza Brigade in the Karam al-Jabal neighborhood of Aleppo, who said they could vouch that he lived in this home and that the furniture washis. The young man showed an ID and other paperwork to back his claim. "I just came to get a few things," he said.
"You're welcome," one of the rebels said. "Take what you want, we will help you."
The young man, who told TIME his name was Abu Ghaybar (a Kurdish name) but later told the rebels it was Abu Mohammad, was from Afrin, a Kurdish town north of Aleppo city, although he didn't share that information with the rebels in his home. He and his family had moved into an unfurnished apartment in Haydariye, a safer neighborhood in Aleppo. "I am now less than zero. I don't even have a pillow to offer a guest," he said. "We are sleeping on bare tiles."
Quickly and methodically, Abu Ghaybar moved through his four-room home, shoving clothesinto black plastic rubbish bags provided by the rebels, and stacking white goods at the door. He unplugged the hot plate in the kitchen as several rebels emptied the fridge of eggs, yoghurt, grapes, jam and a bowl of cooked rice. The rebels weren't happy to be doing so, rolling their eyes as they completed their task, but they said nothing to Abu Ghaybar.
"Do you mind if I take this blanket?," Abu Ghaybar told a portly rebel known as 'the teacher' because he taught primary school before he picked up a gun a few months ago.
"Leave that for us please," the teacher said. It was.
(PHOTOS: Syria's Year of Chaos and Photos of a Slow-Motion War)
"My son slept here," Abu Ghaybar said, standing in his only child's room. He spotted a blue tricycle atop a small four-door pine dresser. "My son keeps saying 'baba, are the free army playing with my toys?" (The rebels had their own toys in the room, including a BKC machine gun in one corner.)
Abu Ghaybar moved into the living room, unplugging the TV and removing a few colored pencils from a drawer in the TV cabinet. He gathered up family photos, including a baby picture of his now five-year-old son. He pointed to a bare wall with two nails protruding from it. "My family portraits were here, where are they?" he asked.
"We burnt them," said one of the dozen or so rebels in the room. "You know, if we come into a house and there are pictures of uncovered women we burn them."
Abu Ghaybar didn't respond. He just stood there for a moment. He moved into the corridor, but his mood had clearly changed. "You could drink (alcohol) here, there were prostitutes, everything," he whispered to me. With tears welling in his eyes, he turned to the teacher: "Do you think I am happy living in somebody else's home?" he said. The teacher responded, "We have families, we have honor, we understand. My family had to flee too."
Some 35 minutes after he had entered his home, Abu Ghaybar was on his way out, having loaded up all that he could carry into a small white Suzuki pick-up truck. "Well, it looks like we need a new place now," one of the rebels said. "We don't have a TV any more, what are we going to do for entertainment?"
The others laughed but the fact is, in Bustan al-Basha, as in many other frontline neighborhoods in Aleppo, the deep stalemate led many of the rebels to say they are bored. The fight in these areas has morphed into a war of the snipers, with fewer opportunities to engage the enemy.
(MORE: How the Saudis and Qataris are arming Syria's rebellion)
But that doesn't mean the danger isn't there. Crossing the length of Rawand Street involves running a gauntlet of sniper fire. Blue-and-white canvas curtains have been strung up at several intersections along the street, while bullet-riddled school buses have been dragged across other junctions in a bid to block theview of the regime's sharpshooters. Rebel snipers are always on the lookout for new positions to establish.
They have punched holes through thick apartment walls, creating maze-like safe passages they traverse in the dark. They shout "Allah Akbar" as they approach the holes, lest one of their comrades mistake them for the enemy and open fire. The two sides are so close to each other that it's a possibility.
Some rebels are clearly growing impatient, itching to move to other more active fronts in other areas. Others reflect on why their push has stalled. "It wasn't the time to enter Aleppo, honestly," says Abu Sadek. "I'm not saying this with regret, it was a battle that had to happen, Jihad for the sake of God, but the lack of coordination between thebrigades hurt us. we weren't ready for it." Liwa Suqoor al-Sha'ba says it's planning a major push in the next week or so to try and break the stalemate.
The group is an Islamist brigade under the loose umbrella of the Free Syrian Army. The other two rebel units in the neighborhood are Liwa al-Fateh, which part of the FSA but is not as religiously conservative; and Ahrar al-Sham, a nationwide mini-army of adherents of the conservative Salafi interpretation of Sunni Islam. Ahrar al-Sham is not part of the FSA.
Ahrar al-Sham and Liwa Suqoor al-Sha'ba partly blame Liwa al-Fateh for the rebels' misfortune. They look derisively at the group, not because of its weak Islamist credentials, but because it has allegedly been looting homes and harassing citizens. It mans a checkpoint that stops cars coming from the adjacent Sheikh Maksoud neighborhood. "Look at those shabiha," says a member of Suqoor al-Sha'ba, using the term for the marauding paramilitary gangs of thugs associated with the regime. Abu Tayeb, a member of Liwa al-Fateh at the checkpoint concedes without prompting that "our reputation isn't good." Still, he says, "this is war, and things happen in war. I'm still proud to be a part of this group.
(MORE: The Anti-Assad Offensive: Can the West Oust Syria's Strongman?)
Other rebels say it's that kind of attitude that has stalled their push into the city, just as much as the lack of heavy weapons and regular resupply of ammunition. Any insurgency needs the support of the local population, and looting homes andharassing citizens obviously doesn't help. "The problem is how can you hold a man with a gun accountable?" says Khaled, a second-year history student at Aleppo university who now totes a Kalashnikov. "You must raise your gun against him. It isn't the time for this now, we don't want to open another front among ourselves. We can't afford to do this now."
The way forward, according to the two Islamist groups, is to become more religious,more like the extremist Jabhat al-Nusra units that operate in other parts of Aleppo and across Syria. "You have seen the destruction to homes, and the looting that is happening. How are we supposed to win this fight when some people are stealing, how will we win if the boots we are wearing are stolen?" says Abu Sadek. "How will God make us victorious? He won't. We don't have the power of weapons, so we must return to God to win this fight."
These rebels speak admirably of Jabhat al-Nusra, of their fearlessness on the battlefield which they say stems from their strong faith. Many say they aspire to either join them, or become more like them. Toward that end, a significant number of Suqoor al-Sha'ba fighters in Aleppo have taken to wearing black shalwar kameezes and black headdresses. "Yes, this is Pakistani but they are strong mujahedin (holy warriors)," Ammar, a young fighter says, referring to his dress. "We are an Islamic brigade, we take inspiration from them," he adds, "besides, it's really comfortable, it's good for fighting in." Others say they have discarded their mismatched military uniforms in favor of the Islamic dress because they believe it is similar to that worn by the Sahaba (companions of the Prophet Muhammad), not because it is from the Subcontinent.
"Faith," says one of the rebels "Faith will make us victorious, not weapons or ammunition or large numbers of people." The problem is, in cosmopolitan Aleppo—and Syria at large—a religious solution may be part of the problem. On a recent night in one unit's headquarters here, fighters pealed with laughter when they recalled an encounter between a member of Jabhat al-Nusra operating in Aleppo and a secular FSA commander. The pair were in a meeting when a mortar landed nearby. The FSA commander jumped up to leave, according to several men who were present in the meeting. The Jabhat fighter grabbed his companion's knee, saying excitedly. "Heaven awaits." "Go by yourself," came the reply.

subset: commoncrawl


text: The latest generation of the World-Cup-proven intermediate tire, the Butcher GRID TRAIL 2Bliss Ready, receives an entirely new tread pattern. Wider shoulder knobs better support load under hard cornering, while the biting edges of the shoulder knobs are moved further inside, and the center blocks have been staggered and spaced better for a smoother transition when leaning the bike over. Meanwhile, our proprietary GRIPTON compound improves high frequency damping, attaching the tire to the ground better on both small bumps and rough sections. The low frequencies of the rolling tire deflections pass through unfiltered, leaving no energy absorbed and keeping speed high. Once you ride the Butcher, you'll never want another tire for your gravity excursions. Our new GRID TRAIL casing is stiffer, delivering better handling at lower pressuresll while increasing pinch flat protection by 15% and puncture protection by 30%. It's the perfect choice for your gravity excursions,one ride and you'll be hooked. Building on this solid base, the high-dampening T9 Gripton compound rebounds slowly to grip and stick to the ground for total traction and control.


text:
Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales
Air Conditioning specialists based in South Wales, Domestic and Commercial, Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales
Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales can set you back. However, if you choose the right repair company, you have nothing to worry about. We work with home and business owners to help them with the repair affordably. When your air won't come on
It is an important part of the modern home. It helps you stay cool during the summer and warm in the winter. Your repair business can help you get it repaired or replaced.
Whether yours is old or new, we can get it fixed and up and running.
It is way more than just cooling. Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales can help keep your house cool and make your appliances and electronics run efficiently. It helps you be comfortable in your home. There are different types of air conditioners, however, we service them all.
Don't feel the heat, call today!
It's summer and it is hot outside. You are feeling the heat. You start to notice that your unit is not working right. It's time to call a repair company in your area. We are here to offer you a fast and reliable repair service to help you get that unit up and working again. We do commercial work also. Many of our clients are repeat customers because we do our job with excellence and care at affordable prices.
If you have noticed that your electric bill is quite high, you might want to have your air conditioner looked at. Maintenance is important, however, many don't think about it until it simply isn't working.
We install Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales units for homes, commercial buildings, and apartment complexes. To determine what size the unit will be must be calculated. We want your AC bill to be affordable. Most modern AC units are very economical to run. It might even make sense to upgrade your old unit. We can discuss your options and come up with a system that will work with you. We repair both heating and cooling units. We're also a licensed contractor that does HVAC work.
Air conditioning services
We can provide you with tons of information about your current AC unit so you know exactly what type of efficiency you have. We want to make sure it's as efficient as possible so it's better for the environment and more affordable. Our technicians will go through your AC unit and determine what is causing it not to blow ice-cold air.
We're not just a contractor that installs units, we are a company that will be there to repair your unit for years to come. We have the expertise and the technology to provide you with affordable HVAC. Let's get you comfortable in your home and business no matter what the temperature is outdoors.
We use the highest quality equipment in the industry to ensure precise service and efficient results. We are the most reputable company in our field of expertise and have been around for many years. Our dedicated technicians provide the best service and satisfaction which is our top priority. Best of all, we are licensed, bonded, and insured so you can rest easy knowing that you have the very best repair service in the area. Call today!
Our Air Conditioning Repairs Welshpool South Wales company can help you with your repair needs.


text:
An old Cherokee chief was teaching his grandson about life…
"A fight is going on inside me," he said to the boy. "It is a terrible fight and it is between two wolves. "One is evil – he is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, self-doubt, and ego.
"The other is good – he is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, and faith.
"This same fight is going on inside you – and inside every other person, too."
The grandson thought about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather, "Which wolf will win?"
The old chief simply replied, "The one you feed."


text:
KMC Super Drift Challenge Results;
Conrad Grunewald Takes the Victory
Long Beach, Calif. – April 19, 2015 – Formula DRIFT hosted the KMC Super Drift Challenge during the Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach. Conrad Grunewald in the Always Evolving / Replay Camera Chevrolet Camaro takes the victory.
The KMC Super Drift Challenge for the third consecutive year brought motorsports action under the lights during the annual Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach with a filled capacity within Turns 9, 10, and 11 of the famous street course. Sixteen of the top Formula DRIFT drivers competed for a $25,000 prize purse.
"We were excited to be able to showcase competition drifting under the lights on the streets of Long Beach," stated Jim Liaw, president and co-founder of Formula DRIFT. "Then to see a capacity turn out for the fierce competition capped off an eventful Saturday at the Toyota Grand Prix of Long Beach."
The action under the lights along created a unique and competitive environment for the drivers. Number one qualifier, Forrest Wang in Get Nuts Lab / Hankook Tire Nissan S14 finishes in third place for the second consecutive year. Conrad Grunewald met Robbie Nishida in the Achilles Motorsport / Bridges Racing Lexus SC300 in the finals. Grunewald outmatched Nishida to take the event victory.
"I'd like to start off by thanking my partners because without them I wouldn't be here. I couldn't be happier with wining tonight," said Conrad Grunewald, winner of the KMC Super Drift Challenge. "It's almost surreal to be running at night in Long Beach. It's an honor to walk away with a win amongst such great competitors."
Formula DRIFT continues to Round 2: Road to the Championship at Road Atlanta on May 8-9, 2015. Tickets are available and can be purchased via www.formuladrift.com.


text:
Fantasia: I Am 'Not Responsible' For Divorce
Fantasia: I Am 'Not Responsible' For Divorce
Fantasia Barrino says she is "not responsible" for breaking up a marriage ... despite allegations from a North Carolina woman named Paula Cook who claims Fantasia made sex tapes with her husband.
Fantasia's manager, Brian Dickens, just released a statement saying the former "American Idol" champ is "certain that she is not responsible for the deterioration of the Cook's marriage."
The statement goes on to say, "Fantasia will weather this storm with the dignity and grace that she has exemplified throughout a life in which she has repeatedly overcome obstacles and challenges. Fantasia's faith in God, herself and family remain as strong as ever."
As we previously reported, Paula Cook just filed for divorce from her husband Antwaun. In the court docs, Paula accused the guy of having a "covert adulterous affair" with Barrino ... and believes they "recorded their illicit activity."
UPDATE: Fantasia's lawyer, Gena Morris, is officially on the attack -- telling TMZ, "Mrs. Cook gratuitously included claims about Fantasia to sensationalize that litigation and to insure that her tale would be picked up by tabloids."
Morris added, "The fact that she would seek such publicity in a case involving her children is particularly disgraceful."


text:
Office Babes
Office Stockings
Japanese Office
Girls With Glasses Office
Office Anal
Asian Office
Office Pornstar
Office Facial
Office Blowjob
Pov Office
Latina Office
Lesbian Office
Office Threesome
Amateur Office
Player Initialization Error
Please check that Flash Player is installed
Please Tell Us The Reason
THIS DOWNLOAD IS LOCKED! Thanks For Sharing
To download the video simply share the video using one of the buttons below
You must be logged in to suggest tags
Members Login
Here's what you are missing on!
A Message about error of login
Remember me on this computer
(not recommended on public or shared computers)
Not A Member?
Create a Free Account To:


text:
ScienceDaily- Damaged Connections in Phineas Gage's Brain
Damaged Connections in Phineas Gage's Brain: Famous 1848 Case of Man Who Survived Accident Has Modern Parallel
Recreation of Gage accident. (Credit: Copyright John Darrell Van Horn and the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging, 2012)
ScienceDaily (May 16, 2012) — Poor Phineas Gage. In 1848, the supervisor for the Rutland and Burlington Railroad in Vermont was using a 13-pound, 3-foot-7-inch rod to pack blasting powder into a rock when he triggered an explosion that drove the rod through his left cheek and out of the top of his head. As reported at the time, the rod was later found, "smeared with blood and brains."
Miraculously, Gage lived, becoming the most famous case in the history of neuroscience — not only because he survived a horrific accident that led to the destruction of much of his left frontal lobe but also because of the injury's reported effects on his personality and behavior, which were said to be profound. Gage went from being an affable 25-year-old to one that was fitful, irreverent and profane. His friends and acquaintances said he was "no longer Gage."
Over the years, various scientists have studied and argued about the exact location and degree of damage to Gage's cerebral cortex and the impact it had on his personality. Now, for the first time, researchers at UCLA, using brain-imaging data that was lost to science for a decade, have broadened the examination of Gage to look at the damage to the white matter "pathways" that connect various regions of the brain.
Reporting in the May 16 issue of the journal PLoS ONE, Jack Van Horn, a UCLA assistant professor of neurology, and colleagues note that while approximately 4 percent of the cerebral cortex was intersected by the rod's passage, more than 10 percent of Gage's total white matter was damaged. The passage of the tamping iron caused widespread damage to the white matter connections throughout Gage's brain, which likely was a major contributor to the behavioral changes he experienced.
Because white matter and its myelin sheath — the fatty coating around the nerve fibers that form the basic wiring of the brain — connect the billions of neurons that allow us to reason and remember, the research not only adds to the lore of Phineas Gage but may eventually lead to a better understanding of multiple brain disorders that are caused in part by similar damage to these connections.
"What we found was a significant loss of white matter connecting the left frontal regions and the rest of the brain," said Van Horn, who is a member of UCLA's Laboratory of Neuro Imaging (LONI). "We suggest that the disruption of the brain's 'network' considerably compromised it. This may have had an even greater impact on Mr. Gage than the damage to the cortex alone in terms of his purported personality change."
LONI is part of an ambitious joint effort with Massachusetts General Hospital and the National Institutes of Health to document the trillions of microscopic links between every one of the brain's 100 billion neurons — the so-called "connectome." And because mapping the brain's physical wiring eventually will lead to answers about what causes mental conditions that may be linked to the breakdown of these connections, it was appropriate, as well as historically interesting, to take a new look at the damage to Gage's brain.
Since Gage's 189-year-old skull, which is on display in the Warren Anatomical Museum at Harvard Medical School, is now fragile and unlikely to again be subjected to medical imaging, the researchers had to track down the last known imaging data, from 2001, which had been lost due to various circumstances at Brigham and Women's Hospital, a teaching affiliate of Harvard, for some 10 years.
The authors were able to recover the computed tomographic data files and managed to reconstruct the scans, which revealed the highest-quality resolution available for modeling Gage's skull. Next, they utilized advanced computational methods to model and determine the exact trajectory of the tamping iron that shot through his skull. Finally, because the original brain tissue was, of course, long gone, the researchers used modern-day brain images of males that matched Gage's age and (right) handedness, then used software to position a composite of these 110 images into Gage's virtual skull, the assumption being that Gage's anatomy would have been similar.
Van Horn found that nearly 11 percent of Gage's white matter was damaged, along with 4 percent of the cortex.
"Our work illustrates that while cortical damage was restricted to the left frontal lobe, the passage of the tamping iron resulted in the widespread interruption of white matter connectivity throughout his brain, so it likely was a major contributor to the behavioral changes he experienced," Van Horn said. "Connections were lost between the left frontal, left temporal and right frontal cortices and the left limbic structures of the brain, which likely had considerable impact on his executive as well as his emotional functions."
And while Gage's personality changed, he eventually was able to travel and find employment as a stagecoach driver for several years in South America. Ultimately, he died in San Francisco, 12 years after the accident.
Van Horn noted a modern parallel.
"The extensive loss of white matter connectivity, affecting both hemispheres, plus the direct damage by the rod, which was limited to the left cerebral hemisphere, is not unlike modern patients who have suffered a traumatic brain injury," he said. "And it is analogous to certain forms of degenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease or frontal temporal dementia, in which neural pathways in the frontal lobes are degraded, which is known to result in profound behavioral changes."
Van Horn noted that the quantification of the changes to Gage's brain's pathways might well provide important insights for clinical assessment and outcome-monitoring in modern-day brain trauma patients.
Other authors of the study were Andrei Irimia, Micah C. Chambers, Carinna M. Torgerson and Arthur W. Toga, all of UCLA, and Ron Kikinis of Harvard Medical School. The work was performed as part of the Human Connectome Project.


text:
-Materials: Swarovski crystals
-Metal: Sterling silver electroplated over brass
-Size: Strap adjustable 7″-8″ and pendant 0.75" long
-Handmade in our NYC studio
-Complimentary gift wrapping
The Hamsa is a Middle Eastern symbol of good luck intended to ward off evil and protect its wearer. Israeli designer Michal Golan integrates both the cultural importance and the mystical significations of the symbol in her Hamsa line. She invigorates the Hamsa through the use of gems, colors, and texture; while maintaining the original integrity of the Hamsa through traditional designs and shapes.


text:
Saudi, Turkish Cooperation Essential to Credibility
(New York, October 18, 2018) – Turkey should urgently ask UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres to establish a United Nations investigation into the possible extrajudicial execution of the prominent Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi, the Committee to Protect Journalists, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Reporters Without Borders said today.
The investigation should determine the circumstances surrounding Saudi Arabia's role in the enforced disappearance and possible killing of Khashoggi. It should aim to identify everyone responsible for ordering, planning, and executing any operations connected with the case.
"Turkey should enlist the UN to initiate a timely, credible, and transparent investigation" said Robert Mahoney, deputy executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists. "UN involvement is the best guarantee against a Saudi whitewash or attempts by other governments to sweep the issue under the carpet to preserve lucrative business ties with Riyadh."
Evidence collected by the UN investigation team should be preserved for use in future prosecutions. The investigation team should have complete access to travel where it needs to and to interview potential witnesses or suspects without interference. The team should also recommend avenues for bringing to justice anyone against whom credible and admissible evidence of involvement is found.
Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, 2018 and has not been seen or heard from since. Saudi Arabia has denied involvement in Khashoggi's disappearance, claiming he left the consulate on his own shortly after his arrival, but it has failed to produce any evidence supporting this claim.
Saudi authorities have escalated their crackdown on dissenting voices in the country since Mohammad bin Salman became crown prince in June 2017, marked by systematic repression of dissent, including peaceful expression directed to the promotion and protection of human rights. Virtually all human rights defenders and critical voices, including religious clerics, journalists, and academics, have been targeted in the recent arrests.
Khashoggi's disappearance comes after more than a year of arrests targeting journalists who reported on corruption, women's rights, and other sensitive issues. Several are being held in unknown locations, without charges, according to research by the Committee to Protect Journalists.
Many individuals, including the prominent women human rights defenders Loujain al-Hathloul, Iman al-Nafjan, and Aziza al-Yousef, have been arbitrarily detained without charge for months. These women activists and many others may face lengthy prison terms or the death penalty following grossly unfair trials before the counterterrorism court for peacefully exercising their rights to freedom of expression, association, or assembly.
The Turkish authorities announced that they had initiated a criminal investigation on the day of Khashoggi's disappearance on October 2. As part of this investigation, they conducted a forensic examination of the Saudi Arabian consulate on October 15. Information from the investigation has been shared with the media through a series of leaks, including claims regarding the existence of audio and visual records proving that Khashoggi was murdered in the consulate.
On October 15, Saudi Arabia's king ordered the Public Prosecution to open an investigation into Khashoggi's disappearance. Given the possible involvement of Saudi authorities in Khashoggi's enforced disappearance and possible murder, and the lack of independence of Saudi Arabia's criminal justice system, the impartiality of any investigation by the Saudi authorities would be in question.
Khashoggi's fiancé, Hatice Cengiz, a Turkish national, told media outlets that when Khashoggi entered the Saudi consulate on October 2 to obtain their marriage documents, he left her his phones and instructions to alert the Turkish authorities if he did not return after two hours. That was the last time Cengiz saw him. Turkish authorities believe Khashoggi was killed and dismembered by Saudi agents inside the consulate.
"This demonstrates all the more clearly how imperative an impartial and independent investigation is in order to establish the truth and ensure justice for Jamal Khashoggi," said Christophe Deloire, secretary-general of Reporters Without Borders. "If the UN is truly mobilized to fight impunity for crimes against journalists, then at the very least they must be fully engaged in one of the most shocking and extreme cases in recent years by undertaking this investigation."
There is a precedent for such a UN investigation. In 2008, Pakistan asked then Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to establish an investigation into the assassination of former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. That investigation uncovered what investigators said was an attempt by Pakistani authorities to whitewash the events surrounding Bhutto's murder.
An investigation into Khashoggi's enforced disappearance and possible murder should start promptly and be thorough, impartial, and independent. UN Secretary-General Guterres should appoint a senior criminal investigator with extensive experience in international investigations to head the team. Once the investigation is concluded, the secretary-general should issue a public report on the overall findings along with his recommendations for following up.
"Jamal Khashoggi's family and the rest of the world deserve the full truth about what happened to him," said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch. "Partial explanations and one-sided investigations by Saudi Arabia, which is suspected of involvement, aren't good enough. Only the UN has the credibility and independence required to expose the masterminds behind Khashoggi's enforced disappearance and to hold them to account."
Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and all other UN member countries should fully cooperate with the UN investigation to ensure that it has all the access and support necessary to determine what happened to Khashoggi. To facilitate the investigation, Saudi Arabia should immediately waive diplomatic protections such as the inviolability or immunity of all relevant premises and officials bestowed by treaties such as the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Michelle Bachelet, the UN high commissioner for human rights, has called for waving these diplomatic protections in the case.
Turkey should turn over all evidence, including audio and visual records that Turkish officials have repeatedly claimed to the media reveal Khashoggi's murder in the Saudi consulate. A newly formed Turkish-Saudi working group investigating the murder will be unable to make progress in the face of Saudi Arabia's blanket denials and rejection of any involvement in Khashoggi's enforced disappearance.
"If the government of Saudi Arabia is not involved in Jamal Khashoggi's fate, it has the most to gain in seeing an impartial UN investigation determine what happened," said Sherine Tadros, head the New York office of Amnesty International. "Without a credible UN inquiry, there will always be a cloud of suspicion hanging over Saudi Arabia, no matter what its leadership says to explain away how Khashoggi vanished."
Jamal Khashoggi is a prominent Saudi journalist with several Saudi Arabia-based Arabic and English-language newspapers including Okaz and the Saudi Gazette, and he served two stints as the editor-in-chief of the Saudi daily al-Watan. In December 2016, Saudi authorities publicly denounced Khashoggi after he criticized then US President-Elect Donald Trump at an event in Washington, and he fled Saudi Arabia to the United States in June 2017, becoming a regular columnist for the Washington Post.
For more information, please contact:
Lucy Scholey, Amnesty International Canada (English): +1 613-744-7667 ext. 236; firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
public interface HasClearHandlers
extends com.google.gwt.event.shared.HasHandlers
Modifier and Type | Method and Description |
com.google.gwt.event.shared.HandlerRegistration |
addClearHandler(ClearHandler handler)
Notification method fired when the canvas is removed from the DOM via a call to
clear() . |
com.google.gwt.event.shared.HandlerRegistration addClearHandler(ClearHandler handler)
. Canvases are cleared recursively, so if a parent is
clear()'d, all of its descendants will also be cleared. This notification is fired before the canvas has been
removed from the DOM, and isDrawn()
will return true
called while the notification is running.handler
- the clear handlerHandlerRegistration
used to remove this handler


text:
240 Shot(multicolor)
Do You Like the Night Sky? Light it up with the Multi color Shots Crackers
Multicolor shot firecrackers hold an interest for essentially everybody as both youthful and elder folks individuals like to see the magnificence of enhanced visualizations of wafers. Picture this present, it's evening time, and the climate feels right, at that point you choose to illuminate the sky and watch that ideal enhanced visualization with your friends and family. This can be real in the event that you purchase multi color shots.
We have different sorts of multicolor shots crackers online. Choose these special crackers that show in all the rainbow colors and enjoy your special moments. Various sizes are accessible, going from medium to big size crackers.


text:
House of Commons
Session 2010-12
Publications on the internet
The Register of Members' Financial Interests: Part 1
As at 29th November 2011
McCARTNEY, Jason (Colne Valley)
2. Remunerated employment, office, profession etc
Payments from Ipsos MORI, 79-81 Borough Road, London SE1 1FY, for opinion surveys:
Payment of £140. Hours: 1 hr. Fee donated to charity. (Registered 2 March 2011)
Payment of £150. Hours: 1 hr. Payment donated to charity. (Registered 10 August 2011)
Payment of £80 from YouGov, 50 Featherstone Street, London EC1Y 8RT, for opinion survey. Hours: 30 mins. Fee donated to charity. (Registered 2 March 2011)
Payment of £450 from ComRes, Four Millbank, London SW1P 3JA, for completing six opinion surveys. Hours: 3 hrs. Payment donated to charity. (Registered 4 May 2011)
5. Gifts, benefits and hospitality (UK)
Name of donor: Grand Central Railway Company Ltd
Address of donor : River House, 17 Museum Street, York, Y01 7DJ
Amount of donation or nature and value if donation in kind: complimentary first class pass valid for travel on Grand Central services, expiry 31 December 2011. The value of the pass is approximately £4,000. Without the pass, part of the travel costs would be met from parliamentary allowances.
Date of receipt of donation: 1 June 2010
Date of acceptance of donation: 1 June 2010
Donor status: company, registration number 03979826
(Registered 21 June 2010)
6. Overseas visits
Name of donor: Mr Abdul Rasak
Address of donor: private
Amount of donation (or estimate of the probable value): £1,400
Destination of visit: Pakistan
Date of visit: 18-22 November 2010
Purpose of visit: visit to village hit by floods to distribute aid and to meet families, businesses and community leaders with connections to Colne Valley.
(Registered 25 November 2010)


text:
Car magazine is the must-read magazine for anyone passionate about cars. Car keeps you up to date on all things cars - from groundbreaking supercars to everyday family cars and practical city cars.
Written by the finest journalists in the car world, you'll love Car's honest and thorough reviews of the very latest rides - tested against their main competitors on the world's most unforgiving roads. Whether you're dreaming of the car you've always wanted, or looking for serious advice on which car to buy, Car digital magazine is the perfect guide for you.
Each month, you'll get unrivalled access to the car industry - from exclusive interviews of the finest minds driving the future of the car industry to stunning photography and scoops before any other source.
Join the thousands of Car magazine readers today, with a monthly digital subscription to Car - the ultimate car magazine - or why not gift a subscription to the petrol head in your life?
First launched in 1962, Car magazine is famed for its in-depth car reviews - putting rival cars up against each other, as well as it's notorious 'scoops' releasing new car designs way ahead of their official release.
Originally titled as the Small Car and Mini Owner incorporating Sporting Driver, Car magazine was renamed in 1965 and became the most influential car magazine around. It initiated the highly respected 'Car of the Year' competition in the 1960s, with results decided upon by motoring journalists from across Europe.
Today, Car is still one of the most influential motoring magazines around and best-loved for its 'The Good, The Bad and The Ugly' car listing feature, with humorous yet insightful details on new cars. You'll love the fascinating technology section - revealing the latest innovations that'll change the way we think about cars forever.
Equally popular is the 'Icon Buyer' feature, with new vs. used shootouts. Pitting new cars against used to give you invaluable insights on which used cars will give you the best bang for your buck.
Whether you're passionate about hot wheels, or you're looking for help in buying a new or used car, then you'll love a digital subscription to Car magazine.
A Car digital magazine subscription is a must-have for all car enthusiasts, you'll enjoy:


text:
The Senate just held a cloture vote on whether to proceed with debate on the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act. It needed 60 votes to proceed. And the Senate says …
Agreed to move forward, 74-14!
Climate change will now be open for debate on the Senate floor.
UPDATE: Now they're debating about when to start debate, and how much time to allot for debate. Republicans want 30 hours before amendments can even be introduced. And, of course, as John Kerry (D-Mass.) just pointed out, each amendment could have infinite debate after that.
In the meantime, here's the list of senators who voted against cloture:
Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.)
Jim Bunning (R-Ky.)
Richard Shelby (R-Ala.)
Larry Craig (R-Idaho)
Jim DeMint (R-S.C.)
Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)
Michael Enzi (R-Wy.)
John Barrasso (R-Wy.)
Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.)
Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.)
Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)
Wayne Allard (R-Colo.)
James Inhofe (R-Okla.)
UPDATE II: To clarify, this vote isn't actually the motion to proceed — it's merely a cloture vote on the motion to proceed. Republicans have asked for 30 hours of discussion on the motion to proceed, before any amendments can even be introduced. So yes, they could well be talking about this for 30 more hours before we even get to a debate that's legislatively productive. The Senate will reconvene at 10 a.m. tomorrow morning.


text:
In an episode calling back to us from the near past, we get a little nervous, excited and curious about the then-upcoming Star Trek: Picard. We dig a bit into Trek's enduring franchise, both its evolutions and how after almost two decades, is finally moving its timeline forward.
We try to figure out how Wonder Woman and Star Trek Beyond could have gone from very good to great, with the same third act change. We wonder which members of the "Next Generation" crew have the best managerial skills. And finally, we look at how modern audiences — and studios — don't want to admit that they love inspirational movie heroes.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download


text:
Seniors Living in Fear
March 4th, 2010
As America's population ages and crime statistics rise, citizens 65 and older find themselves more and more vulnerable to property crimes and threats of physical violence. Also, with each advance in computer and communication technology, the possibility of seniors falling victim to the threat of cybercrimes and tax fraud grows. MemphisMojo takes a look at programs such as Memphis Crimestoppers and its new SeniorBSafe initiative and how they are helping seniors help themselves.