Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content
  • CRYPTO REWARDS!

    Full endorsement on this opportunity - but it's limited, so get in while you can!

US Propaganda Enters Into Insane, Irrational Overdrive In Attempt to "Sell" War In Syria


thegente
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-24/us-propaganda-enters-insane-irrational-overdrive-attempt-sell-war-syria

US Propaganda Enters Into Insane, Irrational Overdrive In Attempt to "Sell" War In Syria

 

 

 

 

Thanks to a dizzying barrage of lies, mainstream media fear-mongering and a couple of beheadings, the Obama Administration finally achieved its long sought after war in Syria. The tactic that proved most effective in mobilizing the American public back into a shivering, post-9/11 fetal position, was the same tactic used by elites in the UK to convince Scotland against voting for independence. That tactic, as I detailed in a recent post, is fear.

However, fear in itself is not enough. It must be coupled with endless slogans and misdirection by the mainstream media and politicians. It must lead the public to subconsciously embrace a thought process that is completely irrational. Such tactics can be labeled propaganda, and it results in a public suddenly supporting a war it strongly opposed only a year ago. All it takes is a little repackaging. Propaganda allows those who profit from war to push the American public into a tizzy of trepidation based on a couple of beheadings from ISIS, while not batting an eye over the daily beheadings that were simultaneously occurring in Saudi Arabia.

So the power structure and its impotent puppet, Barack Obama, intentionally pushed the American public into a frenzy of fear and finally got their little war. Nevertheless, serious people immediately began to call into question two very significant issues with respect to the aggression.

First, it appeared clear to almost everyone without a biased penchant for overseas death and destruction, that the war is completely unconstitutional and illegal no matter how you slice it. As I highlighted in the post, Obama’s ISIS War is Not Only Illegal, it Makes George W. Bush Look Like a Constitutional Scholar:

But the 2001 
 does not apply here. That resolution — scaled back from what Mr. Bush initially wanted — extended only to nations and organizations that “planned, authorized, committed or aided” the 9/11 attacks.

 Not only was ISIS created long after 2001, but Al Qaeda publicly 
 it earlier this year. It is Al Qaeda’s competitor, not its affiliate.

 

Mr. Obama may rightly be frustrated by gridlock in Washington, but his assault on the rule of law is a devastating setback for our constitutional order. His refusal even to ask the Justice Department to provide a formal legal pretext for the war on ISIS is astonishing.

 

Senators and representatives aren’t eager to step up to the plate in October when, however they decide, their votes will alienate some constituents in November’s midterm elections. They would prefer to let the president plunge ahead and blame him later if things go wrong. But this is precisely why the War Powers Resolution sets up its 60-day deadline: It rightly insists that unless Congress is willing to stand up and be counted, the war is not worth fighting in the name of the American people.

So that’s glaring problem number one. The second problem, which I highlighted in the post, The American Public: A Tough Soldier or a Chicken Hawk Cowering in a Cubicle? Some Thoughts on ISIS Intervention, is that:

Did you know that the US government’s counterterrorism chief Matthew Olson 
 that there’s no “there’s no credible information” that the Islamic State (Isis) is planning an attack on America and that there’s “no indication at this point of a cell of foreign fighters operating in the United States”? Or that, 
, “The FBI and Homeland Security Department say there are no specific or credible terror threats to the US homeland from the Islamic State militant group”?

So as quickly as it began, Obama’s little war had some serious PR issues. So what did the chicken-hawks do? They repackaged and resold the entire thing. Enter Khorosan.

Yep, just as quickly as ISIS spontaneously generated like maggots on meat from the sands of Mesopotamia to open the door to another Middle East quagmire, another existential threat nobody had ever heard of suddenly emerged. Not only that, but this group supposedly posed an imminent threat to America. How incredibly convenient.

Here’s ABC News compliantly pushing the latest propaganda to its lobotomized readership in the article, US Averts ‘Active Plotting Against Homeland’ By Hitting Al Qaeda Cell Khorasan in Syria:

American airstrikes in Syria have taken out members of a shadowy al Qaeda unit known as the Khorasan Group who were planning “imminent” attacks against targets including the U.S., the Pentagon said today.

 

Pentagon spokesperson Rear Admiral John Kirby declined to go into specifics,
but told ABC News’ George Stephanopolous, “We had very good indications that this group, which is a very dangerous group, was plotting and planning imminent attacks against Western targets to include the U.S. homeland and it was on that basis that we struck targets, Khorasan targets inside Syria.”

 

The Khorasan Group — consisting of about 50 or so hardened fighters of mixed past and current jihadi affiliations — has been holed up in 
 under the protection of al Qaeda’s official wing in the country, Jabhat al-Nusra, developing cutting edge weapons of terror with the help of al Qaeda’s 
 affiliate to strike Western civilian aviation targets, according to a half-dozen officials with knowledge of the group who spoke to ABC News.

So all of a sudden the Pentagon identifies and targets a group of 50 fighters in Syria, which happens to be conveniently tied to al-Qaeda (thus justifying strikes under the 2001 AUMF), planning an imminent attack on the “homeland.”

There are two reasons I distrust this meme. First of all, the U.S. government employs an extremely bizarre definition when using the word imminent.

As Trevor Timm noted earlier today in the Guardian:

Take, for example, this definition from 
, which was leaked last year, intended to justify the killing of Americans overseas:

 

An “imminent” threat of violent attack against the United States does not require the 
 to have clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons will take place in the immediate future.

 

To translate: “imminent” can mean a lot of things … including “not imminent”.

Fascinating, and all this time I thought “imminent” meant “imminent.” Someone should let Merriam-Webster know they’ve got it all wrong.

Screen-Shot-2014-09-24-at-11.37.56-AM.jp

The employment of this new definition of imminent was further solidified in my mind after reading an article from the New York Times titled: In Airstrikes, U.S. Targets Militant Cell Said to Plot an Attack Against the West. In it, we learn that:

American military and intelligence analysts were still studying damage reports from the initial air assault, but senior Obama administration officials expressed hope that they had killed Muhsin al-Fadhli, the leader of Khorasan and a onetime confidant of Osama bin Laden. The officials said they had been contemplating military action against Khorasan in recent months,
but President Obama’s decision to hit the Islamic State’s forces inside Syria provided a chance to neutralize the other perceived threat.

You’ve got to wonder what other unrelated opportunities the ISIS campaign might allow. But I digress.

 The air campaign against Khorasan and the Islamic State got underway even as Mr. Obama flew to New York to meet with world leaders gathering at the opening session of the United Nations General Assembly.
Mr. Obama did not seek United Nations permission for the military campaign,
but he presented the strikes as the collaboration of a multinational coalition that included five Arab nations: Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Bahrain.

Yeah, well he didn’t seek approval from Congress either. Now here’s the money shot.

 
Most officials speaking publicly on Tuesday characterized the Khorasan threat as imminent. Lt. Gen. William C. Mayville Jr., who is in charge of operations for the Pentagon’s Joint Staff, said the terrorist group was nearing “the execution phase of an attack either in Europe or the homeland.”

 

But one senior counterterrorism official, who insisted on anonymity to discuss intelligence matters, said the group
might not have chosen the target, method or even the timing for a strike.
An intelligence official said separately that the group was “reaching a stage
where they might be able to do something.”

Wait, come again? An attack is imminent, yet you don’t know which gigantic continent with hundreds of millions of inhabitants straddling opposing sides of the Atlantic ocean they were going to hit?

Furthermore, they “might not have chosen the target, method or even the timing for a strike,” and they are “reaching a stage where they might be able to do something.” Sure sounds imminent to me. Don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.

So with Americans back to shivering in corners filled with nightmares of Islamists under their beds, the military-industrial complex is set to do what it does best. Get paid. For some details on who will be raking in the big bucks, I turn to Tim Shorrock’s piece earlier today in Salon:

A massive, $7.2 billion Army intelligence contract signed just 10 days ago underscores the central role to be played by the National Security Agency and its army of private contractors in the unfolding air war being carried out by the United States and its Gulf States allies against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

 

Under its terms, 21 companies, led by Booz Allen Hamilton, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman,
will compete over the next five years to provide “fully integrated intelligence, security and information operations” in Afghanistan and “future contingency operations” around the world.

 

INSCOM announced the global intelligence contract two days after President Obama, in a speech to the nation, essentially declared war on ISIS in Iraq and Syria
and outlined a campaign of airstrikes and combat actions to “degrade and ultimately destroy” the terrorist group.

 

The top contractors on the INSCOM contract are already involved in the war. Lockheed Martin, for example, makes the Hellfire missiles that are used extensively in U.S. drone strikes (in 2013, it also won a three-year contract to train INSCOM’S “Army intelligence soldiers” in “analytical and operational disciplines”). Northrop Grumman makes the Global Hawk surveillance drone, one of the most formidable weapons in the U.S. arsenal. Both companies have large intelligence units.

 

The role of contractors at the command is spelled out by BAE Systems, which has its own INSCOM website. “We enhance the U.S. Army’s ability to detect, decide, and act on vital intelligence in real-time,” BAE 
. “From Intelligence Analysis to Persistent Surveillance, BAE Systems is proud to provide essential and sustainable end-to-end solutions and support to the warfighter.”

 

As I first 
 in Salon in 2007 and later chronicled in my book “Spies for Hire,” 70 percent of the U.S. intelligence budget is spent on private contractors.
Much of this spending – estimated at around $70 billion a year – winds up at the NSA, where SIGINT operations, particularly for collection and analysis, were heavily outsourced at the turn of the century.

 

“Hayden started the privatization, but it was really Alexander who built it,” said Drake.

 

Alexander’s ties with INSCOM are extensive. One of the winning bidders on the new INSCOM contract is 
. Russell Richardson, its former CEO and a former INSCOM commander, is now one of Alexander’s partners at IronNet and, under Alexander’s command of INSCOM, was its “chief architect.” Before that, Richardson was a vice president of NSA contractor SAIC, where he ran INSCOM’s so-called Information Dominance Center.

 

INSCOM’s ties with Booz Allen, the company that employed Edward Snowden at its top secret site in Hawaii, are equally close. Robert Noonan, who directs the company’s “military intelligence account,” served for 35 years in the military, including a stint as INSCOM’s commanding general and the US Army’s deputy chief of staff for intelligence. Roberto Andujar, the INSCOM contract leader at Invertix Corp., another contract winner, once served as the command’s chief information officer (CIO).

 

The revolving door between INSCOM and its contractors bothers Shaffer.
“It’s a cash-and-carry program,” he said. “You go in there and get the knowledge, then you carry it out and get cash.”

 

The Pentagon press office referred all calls on the contract to INSCOM. The command did not comment by press time.

Wake up America. You will continue to be raped, pillaged and economically strip-mined until you stand up for yourselves, but for now, it appears the fetal position suits you just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Killing innocent people with gas (which the UN found was NOT deployed by Assad), didn't work... not enough to galvanize the American will to support further war.... They had to pull out the big guns and instill insanely irrational fear.... fear has always been a monumental force driving people to surrender pieces of their humanity..... even nothing more than fear of the "possibility" that something could happen will serve to drive people... .. Works ever single time, if the correct trigger can be identified. Every single time...

 

Meanwhile back at the ranch, there seems to be very little unified outcry at the very real things currently destroying the  American way of life....

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQzz-TpRfC4

Edited by Rayzur
  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep Razor, the "Weapons of mass destruction" tactic didn't work to get the American public behind it a year ago when the lies about Assad gassing his people didn't work, so they just created another Muslim boogeyman to scare the sheeple...amazing how short people's memorys are these days. They can't even remember that a year ago the US wanted a war in Syria for a gas pipeline and wanted to over throw Assad, so they could run it thru the country. And now with their ISIS monster, the same folks that were saying NO to a war in Syria, and now cheering the bombing on...all they needed was a "fear frenzy" and they got exactly what they wanted. Now back to  "Dancing with The Stars" to be immediately followed by "The Kardashians play Monday Night Football"...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Syria is a black hole! There is NOTHING in Syria that will profit the USA!

 

It has been and will continue to be the training grounds, and Headquarters for all Middle East Terrorist Organizations!

 

Assad is the worst or them all but if he is backed by Russia he is untouchable!

 

Gym, I NEVER said there was anything of value in Syria, except the simple fact, it stands in the way of the Qatari-Turkey pipeline. Qatar is, and has been funding the insurrection against Syria/Assad for just that reason. Putin has the natural gas monopoly on Europe and Qatar doesn't like that. So, since they are our "allies" we are obliged to be the guy with the big stick to clear a path for them. ISIS is just the excuse to clear the path.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar-Turkey_pipeline

 

 

Who's sponsoring rebels/ISIS and why:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed

 

CIA training rebels:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/cia-ramping-up-covert-training-program-for-moderate-syrian-rebels/2013/10/02/a0bba084-2af6-11e3-8ade-a1f23cda135e_story.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • Similar Content

    • By yota691
      Secretary Pompeo's remarks at the Int'l Institute for Strategic Studies Manama Dialogue - 10:45 AM
      20,565 views•Streamed live on Dec 4, 2020
       
    • By Theseus
      Exclusive Look into the Islamic State’s New Leadership
      September 17, 2020 by Hassan Hassan
      Tucked in a 100-page document that a dissident group within the Islamic State released in 2018 was an incredible story about a miracle. The biographical document was meant to chronicle the life of an Iraqi jihadist from being a young man with an ambition to raise pigeons to becoming one of the most influential ISIS leaders. 
      The biography of Abu Ali al-Anbari, ISIS’s former deputy who was killed in 2018, had clearly been meant to establish the person’s religious and tribal credentials, in case the leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi was to be killed. It speaks about how the family was not of Turkish origins as it was widely known, that he grew up in a devout family, and that his father had predicted he could one day become the leader of the Muslim community, much like al-Baghdadi. The prediction, according to the biography, came after a leaf fell from a tree into a copy of the Quran al-Anbari was reading, and it somehow had the word “Allah” written on it. His father told him he had a bright future ahead of him.
      That document has a renewed relevance. A central claim in the document involves the ethnic origins of the family to whom the current ISIS leader belongs. If he is of Turkish origin, then his claim to be of the Arab tribe of Quraysh is false, and thus his claims to be a caliph are illegitimate. ISIS insists he belongs to the tribe of Prophet Mohammed, and that only one of those could claim to be the legitimate leader of the Muslim community, as told by Islamic traditions some extremists cite. 
      This question about the true origins of the current leader of ISIS has led the United Nations to conclude in a report that Hajji Abdullah was merely a placeholder caliph until his organization could find an Arab with the right tribal and religious qualifications. On the other hand, both ISIS and the tribe insist the tribe is in fact Arab, even if it was “Turkified” in the way they integrated, in terms of language and traditions, with the Turkomen in northern Iraq with whom they mingled for centuries.
      Sources in Iraq have now revealed biographical details never told before about the current leader of ISIS, which should put an end to speculations in media and policy circles about his tribal origins, but also shed light into the leadership core of this shadowy organization and its worldviews.
      Amir Muhammad Sa’id Abd-al-Rahman al-Mawla, which is the real name of the person identified by ISIS only as Abu Ibrahim al-Hashemi al-Qurashi, was born in 1976 in a village near Mosul. The village, known as al-Mahalabiyah, is dominated by the Turkomen ethnic minority in Iraq, which is why authorities in Iraq and the United States were convinced the group lied about the ethnic origins of its leader — an aspect they hoped they could exploit to exacerbate existing disputes within the organization, according to sources in Baghdad familiar with those discussions.
      He is the second leader after al-Baghdadi, who was killed in a U.S. raid in northern Syria last October, to have formal religious training. He holds a bachelor’s degree in Islamic studies from a shariah college at the University of Mosul. His father was also an imam at a mosque in Mosul, and the current leader developed a nickname as the teacher or master, for his religious knowledge. Al-Mawla even served as a judge in the Islamic State of Iraq (known at the time as al Qaeda in Iraq) before he was captured and jailed by the United States in southern Iraq in Camp Bucca in 2008. 
      He was released the following year. Iraqi sources say he was released after he denied that he pledged allegiance to al Qaeda and after informing on all his fellow jihadists, as detailed in documents of the U.S. authorities’ interrogation of the current leader when he was in jail. But well-placed Iraqi sources cast doubt on what they describe as “weak” claims about the group’s current leadership that could only help the group in the long-run. This pushback against such misleading details matters: the Iraqi sources argued that false information, meant to mock the organization, sometimes ended up helping the organization when those claims would later be debunked, and could cloud our understanding of dynamics within the group. Examples of such botched counter-propaganda include misidentifying certain leaders as former Baathists or that the current leader lied about his Arab origins.
      The Iraqi sources say al-Mawla had been a trusted aide of al-Baghdadi before the latter was killed, which would not have been the case if al-Mawla had informed on his fellow jihadists. Such groups have developed a system of surrounding their leaders with reliable and trusted individuals trained to withhold critical information. Another grounds for the pushback against the claim is that the same claim was made by authorities in Baghdad about another top ISIS leader, namely Abdul Nasser Qardash, a relative of the current leader. The claim about Qardash was independently corroborated by a jihadist source in Syria, who said he had known Qardash when both were part of the anti-American insurgency in 2005. The jihadist source in Syria said that Qardash had told the United States all details he knew about al Qaeda’s bases in Iraq. As a result, the leader of al Qaeda in Iraq at the time, the Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, had instructed his group never to give Qardash a leadership position when he left prison, because he was a snitch.
      Official and other sources offer another picture that authorities publicly draw of the new leadership of ISIS. Hajji Abdullah, the current ISIS leader, is part of a tight group within the organization, followers of al-Anbari, the former top ISIS leader whose father had predicted he could command the faithful. Up to his death, Anbari had been the longest-serving and highest-ranking cleric within ISIS. He had been associated with the insurgency against Saddam Hussain in the 1990s and early 2000s.
      That faction, known as the Qaradish, have always played a key and outsized role within ISIS since its inception, even if the organization was publicly known as the child of one foreign jihadist from Jordan. Before the current leader, al-Anbari was the closest this faction came to taking over ISIS, and his biography was a preemptive attempt to justify his credentials. He was killed even before al-Baghdadi’s demise, but his relative al-Mawla made it.
      Hassan Hassan is the director of the Nonstate Actors and Geopolitics program at the Center for Global Policy. Hassan is also the co-author of the New York Times Bestselling “ISIS: Inside the Army of Terror” (New York, 2015). He is a contributing writer at The Atlantic, The Guardian and Foreign Policy. Follow him  at @hxhassan 
    • By yota691
      08-26-2020 12:51 PM Al-Kazemi sends a message to the lion by Al-Fayyad
       
       
      Baghdad / Al-Akhbariya
      The head of the Popular Mobilization Authority in Iraq, Faleh Al-Fayyad, has arrived in the Syrian capital, Damascus.
      And local media reported, "The head of the Popular Mobilization Authority, Faleh Al-Fayyad, arrived in Damascus and delivered President Bashar Al-Assad a message from Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kazemi."
      Iraq has strong relations with its neighbor, Syria, and coordination between the two countries is ongoing to confront the terrorist organization ISIS, which is exploiting the geographical spaces between the two countries in order to influence it and carry out its terrorist operations.
    • By Adam Montana
      Link: https://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Is-OPECs-No2-Finally-Complying-With-Output-Cuts.html
       
      Article:
       
      Is OPEC’s No.2 Finally Complying With Output Cuts?
      By Tsvetana Paraskova - Jun 09, 2020, 10:00 AM CDT
      Join Our Community OPEC’s second-largest producer, Iraq, which also happens to be the least compliant member of OPEC+ since the group started managing supply to the market in 2017, may have finally started taking its obligations seriously.
      Iraq’s State Oil Marketing Organization (SOMO) has asked some of the Asian buyers of its Basrah crude grades if they could give up delivery of some already contracted cargoes for loading this month and next, sources familiar with the matter told Bloomberg News on Tuesday.
      The request for buyers to forgo some cargoes for those months suggests that this time, Iraq may be earnest in its attempt to play ball in the OPEC+ production cuts, after being the biggest cheater in all previous pacts.
      Iraq’s (as well as Nigeria’s) non-compliance with the record OPEC+ cuts in May nearly wrecked last week’s meeting of the pact, ahead of which the two leaders of the group, Saudi Arabia and Russia, had insisted that there would be an extension by one month to the current level of cuts only if laggards in compliance ensured over-compliance going forward to compensate for flouting their quotas so far.
      OPEC+ agreed on Saturday to extend the record production cuts of 9.7 million bpd by one month through the end of July, contingent on all countries in the pact complying 100 percent with their quotas and compensating for lack of compliance by overachieving in the cuts in July, August, and September.
      Before the meeting, Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister and then-acting Oil Minister, Ali Allawi, vowed that his country would further reduce production as it remains committed to the OPEC+ pact.
      At the video news conference following the OPEC+ meeting, Saudi Arabia’s Energy Minister, Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman, emphatically said on Monday that “We have no room whatsoever for lack of conformity.”
      Today, Iraq’s new Oil Minister, Ihsan Abdul Jabbar Ismaael, confirmed in a phone call with his Saudi counterpart Iraq’s “full commitment” to the cuts, OPEC said in a press release on Tuesday. Iraq confirms “its commitment to the voluntary oil production adjustments of June and July 2020, as well as the voluntary adjustments for the period following the end of July, despite the economic and financial challenges,” Ismaael told the Saudi energy minister.
      By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com
       
    • By carhar77
      If oil prices go lower, will that cause economic collapse in Iraq?https://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/What-Happens-If-Oil-Prices-Go-Negative.amp.html
  • Testing the Rocker Badge!

  • Live Exchange Rate

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.