söndag 15 september 2013

MEDIAS KRIGSBLUFF: Hur media medvetet och regelbundet manipulerar världen till KRIG

En produktion av James Corbett som först publicerades i Januari 2012. I skenet av de senaste händelserna i Arabvärlden och mainstreammedias samordnade desinformations-kampanjer om Syrien, så är det på sin plats att ta till sig riktig information från GRTV:s videodokumentär. Här avslöjas medielögner som är designade för att manipulera opinionen att acceptera ännu fler blodiga krig för elitens ekonomiska vinning...
***

Faking It: How the Media Manipulates the World into War

September 13, 2013 (from Blacklisted news)


This GRTV production by James Corbett was first released in January 2012. In the light of the recent media disinformation campaign in relation to Syria, we bring this carefully researched video-documentary report to the attention of GR readers. 

As the drums of war begin to beat once again in IranSyria, the South China Sea, and other potential hotspots and flashpoints around the globe, concerned citizens are asking how a world so sick of bloodshed and a population so tired of conflict could be led to this spot once again.

To understand this seeming paradox, we must first understand the centuries-long history of how media has been used to whip the nation into wartime frenzy, dehumanize the supposed enemies, and even to manipulate the public into believing in causes for war that, decades later, were admitted to be completely fictitious.

As the US and Iranian governments escalate tensions in the already volatile Straits of Hormuz, and China and Russia begin openly questioning Washington’s interference in their internal politics, the world remains on a knife-edge of military tension. Far from being a dispassionate observer of these developments, however, the media has in fact been central to increasing those tensions and preparing the public to expect a military confrontation.

But as the online media rises to displace the traditional forms by which the public forms its understanding of the world, many are now beginning to see first hand how the media lies the public into war.…
***

***

[Like this video? Visit our YouTube channel and click the “Subscribe” link to get the latest videos from Global Research!]


The term “yellow journalism was coined to describe the type of sensationalistic, scandal-driven, and often erroneous style of reporting popularized by newspapers like William Randolph Hearst’s New York Journal.

In one of the most egregious examples of this phenomenon, Hearst’s papers widely trumpeted the sinking of the Maine as the work of the Spanish. Whipped into an anti-Spanish frenzy by a daily torrent of stories depicting Spanish forces’ alleged torture and rape of Cubans, and pushed over the edge by the Maine incident, the public welcomed the beginning of the US-Spanish war. Although it is now widely believed that the explosion on the Maine was due to a fire in one of its coal bunkers, the initial lurid reports of Spanish involvement stuck and the nation was led into war.

In many ways, the phrase infamously attributed to Hearst in reply to his illustrator “You furnish the pictures and I’ll furnish the war,” apocryphal as the story may be, nevertheless perfectly encodes the method by which the public would be led to war time and again through the decades.

The US was drawn into World War I by the sinking of the Lusitania, a British ocean liner carrying American passengers that was torpedoed by German U-boats off the coast of Ireland, killing over 1,000 of its passengers. What the public was not informed about at the time, of course, was that just one week before the incident, then-First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill had written to the President of the Board of Trade that it was “most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hopes especially of embroiling the United States with Germany.” Nor did reports of the attack announce that the ship was carrying rifle ammunition and other military supplies. Instead, reports once again emphasized that the attack was an out-of-the-blue strike by a maniacal enemy, and the public was led into the war.

The US involvement in World War II was likewise the result of deliberate disinformation. Although the Honolulu Advertiser had even predicted the attack on Pearl Harbor days in advance, the Japanese Naval codes had already been decipheredby that time, and that even Henry Stimson, the US Secretary of War, had noted in his diary the week before that he had discussed in a meeting with Roosevelt “how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves,” the public were still led to believe that the Pearl Harbor attack had been completely unforeseen. Just last month, a newly-declassified memo emerged showing that FDR had been warned of an impending Japanese attack on Hawaii just three days before the events at Pearl Harbor, yet the history books still portray Pearl Harbor as an example of a surprise attack.

In August 1964, the public was told that the North Vietnamese had attacked a US Destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin on two separate occasions. The attacks were portrayed as a clear example of “communist aggression” and a resolution was soon passed in Congress authorizing President Johnson to begin deploying US forces in Vietnam. In 2005, an internal NSA study was released concluding that the second attack in fact never took place. In effect, 60000 American servicemen and as many as three million Vietnamese, let alone as many as 500,000 Cambodians and Laotians, lost their lives because of an incident that did not occur anywhere but in the imagination of the Johnson administration and the pages of the American media.
In 1991, the world was introduced to the emotional story of Nayirah, a Kuwaiti girl who testified about the atrocities committed by Iraqi forces in Kuwait.


- What the world was never told was that the incident had in fact been the work of a public relations firm, Hill and Knowltown, and the girl had actually been the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador. 

Once again, the public was whipped into a frenzy of hatred for the Hussein regime, not for the documented atrocities that it had actually committed on segments of its own population with weapons supplied to them by the United States itself, but on the basis of an imaginary story told to the public via their televisions, orchestrated by a pr firm.

In the lead-up to the war on Iraq, the American media infamously took the lead in framing the debate about the Iraqi government’s weapons of mass destruction NOT as a question of whether or not they even existed, but as a question of where they had been hidden and what should be done to disarm them. The New York Times led the way with Judith Miller‘s now infamous reporting on the Iraqi WMD story, now known to have been based on false information from untrustworthy sources, but the rest of the media fell into line with the NBC Nightly News asking “what precise threat Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction pose to America”, and Time debating whether Hussein was “making a good-faith effort to disarm Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.”

Reports about chemical weapons stashes were reported on before they were confirmed, although headlines boldly asserted their existence as indisputable fact. We now know that in fact the stockpiles did not exist, and the administration premeditatedly lied the country into yet another war, but the most intense opposition the Bush administration ever received over this documented war crime was some polite correction on the Sunday political talk show circuit.

Remarkably, the public at large has seemingly learned nothing from all of these documented historical manipulations. If anything, the media has become even bolder in its attempts to manipulate the public’s perceptions, perhaps emboldened by the fact that so few in the audience seem willing to question the picture that is being painted for them on the evening news.

Later that year, CNN aired footage of a bombed out Tskhinvali in South Ossetia, falsely labeling it as footage of Gori, which they said had been attacked by the Russians.

In 2009, the BBC showed a cropped image of a rally in Iran which they claimed was a crowd of protesters who assembled to show their opposition to the Iranian government. An uncropped version of the same photograph displayed on the LA Times’ website, however, revealed that the photo in fact came from a rally in support of Ahmedinejad.

In August of 2011, the BBC ran footage of what they claimed was a celebration in Tripoli’s Green Square. When sharp-eyed viewers noticed that the flags in the footage were in fact Indian flags, the BBC was forced to admit that they had “accidentally” broadcast footage from India instead of Tripoli.

Also that month, CNN reported on a story from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claiming that eight infants in incubators had died in a hospital in Hama when Syrian authorities cut off power in the area. Some news sites evencarried pictures of the infants. The images were later admitted to have been taken in Egypt and no evidence has ever emerged to back up the accusations.

As breathtaking as all of these lies, manipulations and so-called “mistakes” are, they in and of themselves don’t represent the only functions of the media for the war machine. Now, the US government is taking the lead in becoming more and more directly involved with the shaping of the media message on war propaganda, and the general public is becoming even more ensnared in a false picture of the world through the Pentagon’s own lens.

In 2005, the Bush White House admitted to producing videos that were designed to look like news reports from legitimate independent journalists, and then feeding those reports to media outlets as prepackaged material ready to air on the evening news. When the Government Accountability Office ruled that these fake news reports in fact constituted illegal covert propaganda, the White House simply issued a memo declaring the practice to be legal.

In April 2008, the New York Times revealed a secret US Department of Defense program that was launched in 2002 and involved using retired military officers to implant Pentagon talking points in the media. The officers were presented as “independent analysts” on talk shows and news programs, although they had been specially briefed beforehand by the Pentagon. In December of 2011, the DoD’s own Inspector General released a report concluding that the program was in perfect compliance with government policies and regulations.

Earlier this year, it was revealed the the US government had contracted with HBGary Federal to develop software that create fake social media accounts in order to steer public opinion and promote propaganda on popular websites. The federal contract for the software sourced back to the MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.

As the vehicle through which information from the outside world is captured, sorted, edited and transmitted into our homes, the mass media has the huge responsibility of shaping and informing our understanding of events to which we don’t have first-hand access. This is an awesome responsibility in even the most ideal conditions, with diligent reporters guided by trustworthy editors doing their level best to report the most important news in the most straightforward way.

- But in a media landscape where a handful of companies own virtually all of the print, radio and television media in each nation, the only recourse the public has is to turn away from the mainstream media altogether.



- And that is precisely what is happening.

As study after study and report after report has shown, the death of the old media has accelerated in recent years, with more and more people abandoning newspapers and now even television as their main source of news. Instead, the public is increasingly turning toward online sources for their news and information, something that is necessarily worrying for the war machine itself, a system that can only truly flourish when the propaganda arm is held under monopolistic control.

But as citizens turn away from the New York Times and toward independent websites, many run and maintained by citizen journalists and amateur editors, the system that has consolidated its control over the minds of the public for generations seems to finally be showing signs that it may not be invincible.

Surely this is not to say that online media is impervious to the defects that have made the traditional media so unreliable. Quite the contrary. But the difference is that online, there is still for the time being relative freedom of choice at the individual level. While internet freedom exists, individual readers and viewers don’t have to take the word of any website or pundit or commentator on any issue. They can check the source documentation themselves, except, perhaps not coincidentally, on the websites of the traditional media bastions, which tend not to link source material and documentation in their articles.

Hence the SOPA ActProtect IP, the US government’s attempts to seize websites at the domain name level, and all of the other concerted attacks we have seen on internet freedoms in recent years.

Because ultimately, an informed and engaged public is far less likely to go along with wars waged for power and profit. And as the public becomes better informed about the very issues that the media has tried to lie to them about for so long, they realize that the answer to all of the mainstream media’s war cheerleading and blatant manipulation is perhaps simpler than we ever suspected: All we have to do is turn them off.
***
***
***







Läs också:

- Vem äger media och varför är nyheterna medvetet vinklade?

 ***


MEDIAS KRIGSBLUFF: Hur media medvetet regelbundet manipulerar världen till KRIG

5 kommentarer:

  1. -Syrian Rebels Furious At U.S.-Russian Deal-

    September 15, 2013

    Source: Zero Hedge

    With major deadlines now pushed off until next year and Assad appearing to come out smelling of (slightly tarnished) roses with his ‘compromise’ agreement with Russia (and the US) to join the chemical weapons treaty, not only is Israel now a major focus but the Syrian rebels – as one might expect – are not happy.

    As Reuters reports, the head of the opposition Syrian Supreme Military Council said on Saturday a U.S.-Russian agreement to eliminate Syria’s chemical weapons was a blow to the two-and-a-half-year uprising to remove President Bashar al-Assad from power.

    Crucially, General Salim Idris notes that this allows Assad “to escape being held accountable,” and, while unverified for now, Idris added, “we have told our friends that the regime has begun moving a part of its chemical weapons arsenal to Lebanon and Iraq.

    We told them do not be fooled.” But another military council official, Qassim Saadeddine, was a little more aggressive:

    “Let the Kerry-Lavrov plan go to hell. We reject it and we will not protect the inspectors or let them enter Syria.”[...]

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-14/financial-states-america

    http://www.blacklistednews.com/Syrian_Rebels_Furious_At_U.S.-Russian_Deal/28871/0/38/38/Y/M.html

    SvaraRadera
  2. Obamas tal till nationen avslutades med konstaterande att USA är exceptionell i hela Världen. Exceptionell? Klart det är. http://tomatobubble.com/id329.html

    SvaraRadera
    Svar
    1. Mer exceptionellt från USA:

      -Abu Ghraib Torture Victims Ordered To Pay U.S. Contractor’s Legal Fees-
      September 15, 2013

      Source: Popular Resistance

      A federal judge on Wednesday ordered four Iraqis who were imprisoned at the infamous Abu Ghraib prison to pay nearly $14,000 in legal fees to defense contractor CACI, an Arlington, Va.-based company that supplied interrogators to the U.S. government during the Iraq War.

      The decision in favor of CACI stemmed from a lawsuit filed by the former prisoners in 2008, alleging that CACI employees directed the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib.

      The suit was dismissed in June, when U.S. District Judge Gerald Bruce Lee ruled that because the alleged acts took place on foreign soil, CACI was “immune from suit” in U.S. court.

      [...]In 2004, shocking photos emerged of prisoners being stacked on top of each other, threatened with dogs, and sexually abused.

      http://undermattans.blogspot.de/2013/07/tortyr-den-officiella-amerikanska.html

      A little over a month after winning the dismissal this summer, CACI requested that the former prisoners be ordered to pay $15,580 to cover the company’s legal expenses.

      http://www.popularresistance.org/abu-ghraib-torture-victims-ordered-to-pay-u-s-contractors-legal-fees/

      http://www.blacklistednews.com/Abu_Ghraib_Torture_Victims_Ordered_To_Pay_U.S._Contractor%E2%80%99s_Legal_Fees/28878/0/38/38/Y/M.html

      Radera
  3. Nu helt öppet och officiellt; vapen made in USA till terrorister, islamister, barnmördare. http://english.pravda.ru/news/hotspots/17-09-2013/125679-obama_arms_syrian_rebels-0/

    "According to IHS Jane's, from 100,000 Syrian rebels about 80,000 are Islamists, and 50,000 of them are radical Islamists."

    Återvinning av erfarna mördare tillbaka till Europa kommer ske så fort Syrien är avklarad. HUR skall regering hantera problemet eller är det inplanerat i destabilisering av det redan oroliga och fragmenterade samhället? Jag ser Place de la Concorde och Madam Guillotine reserverad för de som låtsas vara våra representanter och är de facto agenter för ägare av AB Sverige.

    SvaraRadera
    Svar
    1. al-CIA-da börjar ju bli mainstreams kompisar, så AB Sverige-media kan väl ha ett par ankdamms-diskussioner med al-CIA-da i Pravda/SVT, så försvinner säkert problemet av sig själv... (eller inte?)

      Alternativ lösning här:
      http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-QSxRLw2D2pY/Ua6CstaeH_I/AAAAAAAAVus/lIr9tT20hw0/s1600/Bildt+Reinfeldt.jpg

      RT:s video censurerad på Youtube:)
      http://rt.com/usa/us-weapons-syrian-rebels-745/

      -CIA starts arming Syrian rebels overtly-

      In the past two weeks the US has reportedly begun delivering arms to militants fighting the Syrian government. Washington expects the CIA to monitor the delivery so that the aid does not end up in the hands of Al-Qaeda associates.

      According to the Washington Post report, after months of promises to provide aid to Syrian rebels in an ‘official’ manner, Washington has finally sanctioned open delivery of arms and munitions to anti-Assad forces - despite fears that some of the weapons could end up in the hands of Islamic fundamentalists.[...]

      http://rt.com/usa/us-weapons-syrian-rebels-745/

      -CIA Begins Delivering Weapons to al-Qaeda in Syria-
      http://www.infowars.com/cia-begins-delivering-weapons-to-al-qaeda-in-syria/

      -Syriens rebeller är inte från Syrien: 95% är utländska Legoknektar, Jihadister, Terrorister-
      http://undermattans.blogspot.de/2013/08/syriens-rebeller-ar-inte-fran-syrien-95.html

      Radera

KOMMENTARER

Kommentera helst angående ämnet i artiklarna.
Juridiskt ansvar gentemot slavägarna (myndigheter) ligger helt hos kommentatorn. Uppenbara olagligheter inom hat och hets samt Bullshit & Trollshit plockas bort.