Syria 2.0

Politics, History, & 'Conspiracy'
User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 11701
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 5401

Re: Syria 2.0

Postby Masato » Sun Apr 29, 2018 2:31 pm

This is awesome, Peter Ford, former UK Ambassador to Syria, gets invited on the BBC and totally ousts the fact there is ZERO independant/verified evidence of what happened in Douma.

In fact he even goes to suggest he suspects it to be a FAKED, FALSE FLAG scenario.

Watch the BBC host SQUIRM, lol you can feel the whole studio trembling




Here we see the host desperately try to steer the interview back the other way, dismissing everything he said, inviting him to 'Lets move on to whether this is fact or not', and just assume that Assad IS guilty of a chemical attack. LOLOL just ignore, lets all pretend



Thank you Peter Ford, finally some truth having the guts to break the MSM illusion.

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 11701
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 5401

Postby Masato » Mon Apr 30, 2018 12:59 am

Good article:

Syria – A Case Study in Propaganda
https://www.activistpost.com/2018/04/sy ... ganda.html

Image

Here are the five rules of public relations a.k.a propaganda:

Keep the message simple
Make it emotional
Don’t allow nuances or debates
Demonize the opposition
Keep repeating the message


Rule #1: The principle message has to be simple so that even a 5-year-old can understand. In this case, it was, “Assad used chemical weapons to kill innocent Syrians.” The secondary message was we should do something about it. Everyone who watched TV or read the mainstream/social media got this message loud and clear.

Rule #2: Make it emotional. Propaganda is just marketing. (In fact, the phrase Public Relations was coined to replace Propaganda when the latter became a dirty word after World War I). Every good commercial has an emotional aspect to it. Emotions stop you from thinking and analyzing. Thus, while selling Pepsi, marketers use sexy women, selling a war requires evoking fear and/or anger.

About 120 years ago, when the U.S. wanted to steal Cuba from Spain, it relied upon the exact playbook. “You furnish the pictures, and I’ll furnish the war,” said the newspaper oligarch William Randolph Hearst to his cartoonist. The pictures portrayed dying children and brutal Spanish authorities. (Although Spain is white, the picture on the right used a monstrous person with African American features, since a warmonger could also be racist in those days).

Image

Today, the US government tells the White Helmets, “You furnish the videos, we’ll furnish the war.” It’s the same technique used over and over. Remember during Iraq War 1, when a girl testified before the Congress that Iraqi soldiers were killing newborn babies in incubators? Of course, it turned out to be fake news; and the girl turned out to be the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador.

The Syrian war is also a great study in use of emotional language: “worst chemical attack in Syria in years” (a lie from NY Times that forgot its own article about 52+ chemical attacks by ISIS); “international outrage,” “shocked the world,” “horrific/deadly/ghastly/heinous chemical attack,” etc. Also, the Syrian government is always referred to as “regime” and Assad is always a “dictator” or a “butcher” who “kills his own people.” Every word and phrase is designed to have an emotional impact.

Rule #3: No debate allowed. The media and the pundits left absolutely no doubt who the culprit was. Within minutes after the release of pictures/videos, everyone was blaming Assad. So it didn’t matter if you listened to ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox, or read the NY Times, WaPo or HuffPo … everyone was singing the same tune. Tucker Carlson was the only mainstream person who went off the script, but we are taking care of him.

This kind of consistency is really important in a successful propaganda campaign. No one should be allowed to consider other alternatives – could the attack be staged, could it be a false flag, could it be fake, how do we know when/where the videos were taken, why is it that Assad’s chemical weapons kill only children and civilians and never the jihadists, why do the attacks happen only when Assad is winning, etc.?

There was also no discussion of evidence or proof. We see pictures and videos, and that’s enough. We have a doctor on site who says it’s Sarin or chlorine gas … end of story. Nobody discusses options such as should we send an international team of doctors and experts to the site, should we wait for an autopsy, should we get Assad to answer these charges (gasp!) and so on.

The US Establishment is the jury, judge and the prosecutor. The witness is Al Qaeda who supplies the pictures and the videos, but the average person doesn’t know that either.

The secondary message was also never debated. Even if you assume that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, why should the US do something about it? Is it a moral obligation that only falls on the US? Is it a legal obligation? Does the US intervene every time and anytime some country uses chemical weapons? How about non-chemical weapons? No such discussions are permitted.

Even the bombing was so ridiculous, but the average person doesn’t notice anything suspicious. For example, we bombed the Barzeh research facility that has been inspected and cleared by the OPCW many times, including once in Nov 2017. The fact is that it’s a civilian research and educational center:

Image

Furthermore, the OPCW team had just arrived in Syria on April 13 when the trio of US/UK/France bombed the sites. Wouldn’t it make sense to send the OPCW team to inspect the buildings before bombing them? Also, if the buildings really had chemical weapons, wouldn’t bombing them disperse the chemicals and kill thousands of civilians nearby? The real proof for the civilian nature of these buildings is that within a couple of hours after the bombing, there were Syrian journalists and soldiers walking through the rubble of these lethal “chemical weapons factories.”

Thinking only complicates matters and ruins everything. That’s why propaganda has to keep everything simple.

Rule #4: You have to viciously attack anyone who questions the official narrative. We did a great job of attacking independent journalists and bloggers. Vanessa Beeley, Eva Bartlett and Twitter influencers such as @PartisanGirl and @Ian56789 were all maligned as “Russian bots.” Ian even got banned from Twitter for a few days. Sites such as 21st Century Wire and Russia Insider were brought down by our hackers during the strikes on Syria.

Rule #5: Repetition is key in any successful campaign – selling a product, a politician or a war. Thus the media saturated the airwaves and the Internet with shocking language and pictures and videos. The West really has only one media outlet, but it comes in hundreds and thousands of different names in order to give the illusion of choice and diversity. Thus when the same message is repeated so many times by so many people, it comes becomes the truth.

So, you see, it doesn’t matter if Assad is still in power. The most important thing is that people are gullible and malleable, since that allows us to keep the war going and eventually achieve our goals. I assure you, we will get Syria and then we will get Iran. Yes, it will be a humanitarian disaster of epic proportion, but rest assured that the people of the West will feel good about it. That’s the power of propaganda!

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 11701
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 5401

Postby Masato » Mon Apr 30, 2018 3:16 am

NEW ATTACKS

April 29 2018



General Wesley Clark, 2001: 7 Countries Planned for Overthrow:

Iraq - Syria - Lebanon - Somalia - Sudan - Iran

(not necessarily in that order)




[spoiler]
General Wesley Clark: Because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you've got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September. I said, "We're going to war with Iraq? Why?" He said, "I don't know." He said, "I guess they don't know what else to do." So I said, "Well, did they find some information connecting Saddam to al-Qaeda?" He said, "No, no." He says, "There's nothing new that way. They just made the decision to go to war with Iraq." He said, "I guess it's like we don't know what to do about terrorists, but we've got a good military and we can take down governments." And he said, "I guess if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem has to look like a nail." So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from upstairs" -- meaning the Secretary of Defense's office -- "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran." I said, "Is it classified?" He said, "Yes, sir." I said, "Well, don't show it to me." And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, "You remember that?" He said, "Sir, I didn't show you that memo! I didn't show it to you!"

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 11701
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 5401

Postby Masato » Mon Apr 30, 2018 5:22 pm

LOL

Image

User avatar
Masato
Site Admin
Posts: 11701
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:16 pm
Reputation: 5401

Postby Masato » Tue May 01, 2018 6:23 pm

This was good;

Some professor from Columbia University somehow gets a spot on MSNBC, but goes way off script and tells the truth.

Everyone else on the panel is stunned and dumbfounded, totally unable to compute, lol


User avatar
SRBrant
Posts: 517
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2015 6:08 pm
Reputation: 331

Postby SRBrant » Sun May 06, 2018 12:16 am

"Let's blame the Maine on Spain!"
--Bill Wurtz

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 2117
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 1709

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Sun May 06, 2018 12:36 am

I am burnt out/disgusted with this topic now but my friend BC and I compiled quite a bit of info on the subject in this thread if anyone is interested:

http://www.evilyoshida.com/thread-906.html

User avatar
Som-Pong
Posts: 5363
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2014 3:17 am
Reputation: 2956

Postby Som-Pong » Sun May 06, 2018 9:54 am

Shame it went to shit due to hubris.

User avatar
Illuminat3d0ne
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:26 am
Reputation: 115

Postby Illuminat3d0ne » Tue May 08, 2018 3:09 am

Megaterio Llamas wrote:I am burnt out/disgusted with this topic now but my friend BC and I compiled quite a bit of info on the subject in this thread if anyone is interested:

http://www.evilyoshida.com/thread-906.html

What's this site?
It won't let me access it

User avatar
Megaterio Llamas
Posts: 2117
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
Reputation: 1709

Postby Megaterio Llamas » Tue May 08, 2018 3:55 am

Illuminat3d0ne wrote:
Megaterio Llamas wrote:I am burnt out/disgusted with this topic now but my friend BC and I compiled quite a bit of info on the subject in this thread if anyone is interested:

http://www.evilyoshida.com/thread-906.html

What's this site?
It won't let me access it


It's Evil Yoshida's site. This is weird, I'm not even logged in and I can access it no problem. You should be able to see everything except for the NSFW subforum.


Return to “The Grand Chessboard”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests