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.
Syria 2.0
Good article:
Syria – A Case Study in Propaganda
https://www.activistpost.com/2018/04/sy ... ganda.html
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).
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:
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!
Syria – A Case Study in Propaganda
https://www.activistpost.com/2018/04/sy ... ganda.html
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).
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:
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!
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)
April 29 2018
General Wesley Clark, 2001: 7 Countries Planned for Overthrow:
Iraq - Syria - Lebanon - Somalia - Sudan - Iran
(not necessarily in that order)
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
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
"Let's blame the Maine on Spain!"
--Bill Wurtz
--Bill Wurtz
- Megaterio Llamas
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
- Reputation: 2551
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
http://www.evilyoshida.com/thread-906.html
el rey del mambo
Shame it went to shit due to hubris.
- Illuminat3d0ne
- Posts: 560
- Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:26 am
- Reputation: 258
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
- Megaterio Llamas
- Posts: 4048
- Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2014 7:56 pm
- Reputation: 2551
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.
el rey del mambo
Return to “The Grand Chessboard”
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests