a very curious video sent by a friend. what do you think is happening here in just two minutes;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKGdLSVYLWQ&feature=youtu.be
Monday, September 10, 2018
'our free press' isn't and anyone who still buys that lie aught to go for therapy due to a malfunctioning brain, as the following article will make clear;
Imagine if you and some friends wandered into a completely dark room together for some reason. You’ve never been in this room before, and you can’t see a thing.
Now imagine one of your friends says he can see everything in the room perfectly, and starts describing the different things that he sees in a confident, assertive tone of voice. You know for a fact that there’s no light in the room, so you are doubtful that your friend is able to see any better than you are, but one by one your other friends start talking about the objects in the room as though what he is saying is true. After a while your group starts telling you you’re crazy and evil because you remain skeptical of your first friend’s ability to see the room in pitch darkness, despite his assertive tone of voice and despite the fact that everyone else believes it.
Western public discourse about Syria is very much the same. All the time I get people coming up yelling at me about what a butcher Bashar al-Assad is, how he loves gassing children because he’s an evil monster, how he’s killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in his own country out of sheer sadism, and all I can say to them is, you don’t know that. You don’t know any of those things, you’re just pretending you do because that’s what everyone else is doing. I know you don’t know any of those things because you’re looking at the same information landscape as I am, and it’s chock full of war propaganda. The media matrix is too full of obvious psyops meant to manufacture public consent for military interventionism in Syria for any westerner to have a clear idea of what’s actually happening in that country.
And we know this for a fact, as sure as you know when you’re in a dark room. Take the time CNN knowingly staged a fake, scripted interview with a seven year-old Syrian girl last year and passed it off to its audience as a real interview.
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2018/09/10/that-time-cnn-staged-a-fake-interview-with-a-syrian-child-for-war-propaganda/
Imagine if you and some friends wandered into a completely dark room together for some reason. You’ve never been in this room before, and you can’t see a thing.
Now imagine one of your friends says he can see everything in the room perfectly, and starts describing the different things that he sees in a confident, assertive tone of voice. You know for a fact that there’s no light in the room, so you are doubtful that your friend is able to see any better than you are, but one by one your other friends start talking about the objects in the room as though what he is saying is true. After a while your group starts telling you you’re crazy and evil because you remain skeptical of your first friend’s ability to see the room in pitch darkness, despite his assertive tone of voice and despite the fact that everyone else believes it.
Western public discourse about Syria is very much the same. All the time I get people coming up yelling at me about what a butcher Bashar al-Assad is, how he loves gassing children because he’s an evil monster, how he’s killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in his own country out of sheer sadism, and all I can say to them is, you don’t know that. You don’t know any of those things, you’re just pretending you do because that’s what everyone else is doing. I know you don’t know any of those things because you’re looking at the same information landscape as I am, and it’s chock full of war propaganda. The media matrix is too full of obvious psyops meant to manufacture public consent for military interventionism in Syria for any westerner to have a clear idea of what’s actually happening in that country.
And we know this for a fact, as sure as you know when you’re in a dark room. Take the time CNN knowingly staged a fake, scripted interview with a seven year-old Syrian girl last year and passed it off to its audience as a real interview.
https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2018/09/10/that-time-cnn-staged-a-fake-interview-with-a-syrian-child-for-war-propaganda/
Sunday, September 9, 2018
this i post only because of what is says about mcstain. it gets into other public faces as support for its main points which are historically correct but you won't see presented by 'our free press';
https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/09/john-mccain-a-most-convenient-and-timely-death/
The death of John McCain has been met
with the traditional response. The media outlets you would expect to
support the official line, because they do not report anything else, are
full of praise for this former presidential candidate, war veteran and
distinguished public servant, choosing to focus on those dimensions of
his career rather than others.
However the ones which print the stories
the mainstream ones won’t print are taking the opposite line. They are
reminding readers of McCain’s sordid record as a gun runner for
terrorists, and one who made his fortune from organised crime. He was
bankrolled by the arms dealers whose products strangely ended up in the
hands of terrorists who McCain told “we are with you”, without ever defining who “we” were. It
is not that the other outlets don’t know these facts, but that they
aren’t interested in them, and don’t want the public to associate them
with McCain now his story is over, and we can evaluate the whole
picture.
You would expect agendas to be at work
here. But the question remains, who sets them? Independent outlets are
as biased as mainstream ones, which is one reason people still place
undue trust in mainstream outlets. But there is a fundamental difference
between the two which prevents the agendas of the big outlets being
discussed, a fact they have long exploited.
The more people consume an outlet, the
more that outlet is assumed to publish stories reflecting all shades of
opinion, even when it firmly supports one political side or another.
Otherwise, it wouldn’t have a significant number and range of consumers.
Smaller outlets are perceived to reflect smaller ranges of opinion, and
be responding to cult audiences. Therefore they are thought to be
guiltier of following party lines, even if they are merely digests of
articles from across the board.
So bigger outlets can say what they
like, just like smaller ones, but couch it in terms of observable facts
everyone assumes are the ones they themselves would observe if they were
on the spot. Those who actually observe those events may see things
differently, but they are only isolated individuals. The generality must
have seen what the big outlets saw, or those outlets wouldn’t report
them for such audiences. One person’s insignificant detail is another
person’s core fact, if the mainstream media says so.
We are told what those in power wish us
to hear about John McCain. But as in many other cases, this doesn’t
matter very much. The interesting thing will be what is said when those
same powerful people decide they don’t want to defend him any more – and
that will tell us who is also guilty, and why they don’t want us to
know.
You are our fears
History shows many examples of people’s
reputations, good or bad, changing after their deaths. Sometimes this
happens merely when they have finished their jobs.
https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/09/john-mccain-a-most-convenient-and-timely-death/
https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/09/john-mccain-a-most-convenient-and-timely-death/
https://journal-neo.org/2018/09/09/john-mccain-a-most-convenient-and-timely-death/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)