The Government and Media's False Propaganda for War and How to Spot it Today

4/17/2017

"Kings had always been involving and impoverishing their peoples in wars, pretending generally, if not always, that the good of the people was their object. This, our Convention understood to be the most oppressive of all Kingly oppressions; and they resolved to so frame the Constitution that no one man should hold the power of bringing this oppression upon us." -Abraham Lincoln

Do you hear that? It's the sound of war drums beating throughout the United States. The steady beat coming from the news outlets has led to more discussion on social media. Your friends and family are becoming useful idiots by parroting corporate media claims and politician's talking points . They do this all while assuring you and others that they have the moral high ground. We're going to war 'for the children', 'because no one should attack their own people with gas' and because 'we have to do something!'.

The virtue signaling outweighs any call for truth. Syrian children are being openly exploited in an effort to get everyone on board with war, without verifying any details. Go to war first, then ask questions.

The first casualty of war is the Truth. -Representative Thomas Massie

Any good student of history knows that there will ALWAYS be an emotional event necessary to stir up public buy-in for war. Many times later, as we will see, these events are determined to be frauds perpetuated by those who wish to capitalize on perpetual war.

Let’s analyze this list in reverse chronological order. You might notice a major conflict not listed. We'll discuss it's absence at the bottom.

Syria (now)

On the eve of Peace Treaty talks to discuss the rebuilding of Syria, the quantity of infrastructure money Syria would receive, and after a prolonged campaign which saw the successful repelling of his enemies, Bashar Al Assad decided this was the time to gas his own people.

This move would undoubtedly remove any support he might have had and turn even his allies against him. Read that again. How much sense does that make? No savvy politician would order such an attack unless it was a last resort when facing an existential threat.

Today, an MIT leading weapons academic claimed that the nerve agent attack in Syria was staged, raising questions about who might be responsible. "His analysis of the shell suggests that it could not have been dropped from an airplane as the damage of the casing is inconsistent from an aerial explosion. Instead, Postol said it was more likely that an explosive charge was laid upon the shell containing sarin, before being detonated."

Jason Stapleton also discusses why it makes little sense for Assad to resort to gas attacks at this time:

I’ll leave the discussion surrounding the validity of the sarin gas attack alone. Speculation that the event was faked came immediately. Some was thought-provoking while other claims seemingly grasped for straws.

Photos disturbingly revealed medical responders handling victims bare-handed (it takes about 2-3 seconds of exposure to absorb through the skin with immediate bowel releasing effects). Doubts also surfaced as Dr Shajul Islam , a doctor in charge of receiving victims, spent a fantastic amount of time tweeting about his overrun hospital and its inability to handle so many victims. He entertained others in twitter debates and requested people who didn’t believe him to ‘call him’ when many believe he should have been overrun with patients.

History has a way of determining the validity of these emotional triggers to war. In the meantime, the importance of confirming reports before spending American blood and coin in faraway lands cannot be overstated.

These trends which mold public opinion highlight the importance of discerning truth/fiction when the drum beats of war begin. For instance, this 7-year old Syrian child runs a Twitter account, speaks perfect English, is verified somehow, and is an absolute media darling receiving constant retweets by CNN and other large networks. It’s almost as if the media isn’t even trying to hide their sculpting of public pro-war opinion.

Casualties in Syria to date: 22 Americans

Trump was correct when he said we should leave these people alone and let them sort it out on their own.

Libertarian Shirts Libertarian Country Liberty

Syria (first attempt, 2013)

In 2013 the war drums beat for U.S. intervention into Syria and politicians received a resounding ‘No’ from their constituencies. War-weary citizens weren’t making the “Syrian civil war threatens American interests” connection. Polls saw a substantial shift toward Pro-War sentiment, however, after a particularly gruesome beheading video Americans James Foley and Steven Sotloff on 19 August and 2 September respectively. While many online conspiracy theorists were ridiculed when they questioned the authenticity of the video, they were ultimately validated when it was revealed that the video was likely staged with green screens, camera trickery and slick post-production techniques.

At the direction of U.S. President Barack Obama, the CIA was put in charge of operations worth about $1 billion annually to arm anti-government forces in Syria. It failed terrifically and is largely the result of the current situation today. Headlines such as US-Backed Syrian ‘Moderates’ Behead 12-Year-Old did not demand as much attention for CNN airtime.

Children will always be used as props for war because nothing else tugs on heart strings more. This photo of Omran Daqneesh went viral as 'the iconic image of war-torn Syria'. He and his sister have really been down on their luck. It seems they've been used over and over in multiple war scenes across the country, sometimes even wearing the same war-torn clothes! Videos can be found of photographers setting up this shot while Omran wipes at his bloody face painlessly.

Americans avoided the hefty coordinated push for war by politicians such as Lindsay Graham and John McCain (both highly funded by defense industries that have never met a war they didn’t support) as well as media organizations doing their part to fan the flames of war. Attempted war with Syria was thwarted although persistent bombings and limited military operations have continued ever since.

Casualties in Syria to date: 22 Americans

North Korea (now)

The drum beats for war started even before North Korea launched a KN-15 medium-range ballistic missile approximately 40 miles into the Sea of Japan. It started even before Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson awkwardly said "North Korea launched yet another intermediate range ballistic missile. The United States has spoken enough about North Korea. We have no further comment." Some took that to mean action will follow, not just more rhetoric.

Possible attempts to begin shaping public Anti-North Korean sentiment can be seen as far back as 2014, though it’s seen the rounds on social media and cable reporting more and more the past 6 months.

Listening to this testimony made me immediately think of the fake- Nariyah testimony (Iraqi soldiers throwing babies from incubators, discussed below) which helped shape support for an Iraqi invasion in 1991. No one is claiming North Korea is a paradise. I’m also not claiming this to be fake; merely that it doesn’t pass the smell test.

Casualties in North Korea to date: N/A

Afghanistan (2003)

Whoa, 9/11! People are emotionally attached to this! Look, I won’t argue that 9/11 was/wasn't an inside job. But if Osama Bin Laden was the mastermind, we got him. Why are we still there?

Of course, Bin Laden as justification for the longest war in U.S. history always had its weaknesses. As with Saddam Hussein, Muammar Gadaffi, or Manuel Noriega, past U.S. support for bin Laden had to be kept out of the public discussion. The focus needed to stay on how a ‘crime’ by a non-state actor was transformed into an ‘act of war’. Thus, the War on Terror was born. “It was this crime, in fact, that was used to implicate the nation of Afghanistan, even though 92% of Afghans not only didn't support the crime of 9-11, but they had never to that day even heard about it.” [War Is A Lie, by David Swanson, 2010, Charlottesville]

If retribution against Bin Laden was the goal, we’ve succeeded. Why then, are we still in Afghanistan after his death in May of 2011? Obama didn’t ease up after the killing of bin Laden either. Instead, he tripled all troops deployed to the region from 2009 levels. Media claims which hyped Taliban capabilities were to be expected and to be fair, these are the same Taliban that successfully repelled the Soviet invasion in 1979. They’re fierce fighters with a home field advantage on an unapologetic terrain. It would be erroneous to translate their resistance to our occupying force as a threat to American interests, though. Our troops leave and the Taliban problem is alleviated.

If we’re to believe that Al Qaeda is the new threat, let’s discuss. At this point in history, they have never shown themselves to be a threat to American sovereignty. Other than some false threats of election violence Al Qaeda remains a geopolitically isolated adversary – an adversary that can easily be ignored through non-intervention where no threats exist to American liberty or property.

Not to be overlooked, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) does indeed pose an immediate threat to Saudi Arabia and Arabian interests. Our alliance with them and our reliance on their oil is to blame for the persistent public narrative of ‘American interests are at risk in the region’.

Instead, President Trump's military just dropped the "Mother of All Bombs" (MOAB) in Eastern Afghanistan this week. Their target? A tunnel network that the CIA created to assist the mujaheddin at taxpayer expense.

Casualties in Afghanistan to date: 2400 American military deaths, 20,000 American service members wounded in action. In addition, 1,173 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities.

Iraq (2003)

Colin Powell testifies in front of Congress with a vial of anthrax. “Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction.” Dick Cheney promises that our troops would arrive and be met as ‘liberators’. Ken Adelman promised the voters a ‘cake walk’.

There was no ‘wiggle room’ here as he was using it against his own citizens. Of course, none of the chemical attacks Saddam Hussein conducted against the Iranians drew public outrage most likely because CIA files later proved that the United States was assisting him in that venture.

Following the United Nations’ refusal to authorize the war, George W Bush pressed on anyway. Weapons of Mass Destruction violated the Kellogg-Briand Pact, and violated the U.N. Charter; It was a shaky case that was parroted by all that supported war, but nonetheless, was absolutely false and contrived for the purpose of getting to war. “Bad Intelligence” was ultimately to blame. After more than 1,000,000 deaths and over 4,000,000 displaced refugees, the region has still not recovered and no case is open against any American that perpetuated the WMD myth. Many in media got promoted and can still be seen parroting more war on news panels.

Casualties in Iraqi War: approximately 5000 Americans

Iraq (1991)

On 09 October a 15-year old girl gave compelling testimony in front of Congress that Iraqi soldiers had thrown babies out of incubators in Kuwaiti hospitals and leaving them to die on the floor. Anti-Iraqi public opinion cemented quickly. It wasn’t until many years later that it was confirmed that ‘Nayirah’ was the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to the United States. She was coached by a US public relations firm (all paid by the Kuwaiti government) and later admitted there was no evidence to the narrative. Following the removal of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, instability has plagued the county for 14 years.

Casualties in Iraqi War: approximately 5000 Americans

PANAMA (1990)

Before George H W Bush could attack General Manuel Noriega in Panama in 1989 pro-war public opinion had to be established. An article in the New York Times on December 26, 1989, began:

"The United States military headquarters here, which has portrayed General Manuel Antonio Noriega as an erratic, cocaine-snorting dictator who prays to voodoo gods, announced today that the deposed leader wore red underwear and availed himself of prostitutes."

See, nowhere was it noted that Noriega worked for the United States Central Intelligence Agency. It fails to note that he was able to use that employment to later steal the Panamanian election. It curiously also fails to mention that US/Noriega relations cooled after he failed to support the United States’ aggressions against Nicaragua.

This man liked to snort cocaine off of hookers. That’s front page gold! Also printed freely were reports that multiple stashes of coke were found in one of Noriega’s residences, though later it was revealed that it was merely tamales wrapped in banana leaves. The correction didn’t get nearly as many retweets or ‘likes’ on Facebook as the original inaccurate claim.

Casualties in Invasion of Panama: 23 U.S. service members were killed and 325 were wounded

Vietnam (1964)

Vietnam started as a humanitarian crisis where the US established a foothold of troops in Vietnam by providing aid after massive flooding affected the local populace. When fighting emerged between North and South Vietnam, many officials knew that the U.S. populace would not be convinced that ‘American interests’ were threatened in the Southeast Asian nation.

The Gulf of Tonkin ‘incident’ reportedly occurred August 2, 1964. The claim that US Naval vessels were attacked by Vietnamese in the Gulf of Tonkin was the public opinion counterweight needed to fuel the U.S. propaganda machine. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara later admitted Gulf of Tonkin never happened.

For more head-scratching details, GOOGLE LBJ’s famous comment of “For all I know, our navy was just shooting at whales out there”.

President Lyndon B Johnson and the media famously repeated the talking point that "Some of our boys are floating around in the water.”

Casualties in Vietnam War: More than 5,000,000 were killed or wounded including 4 million civilians, 1.1million North Vietnamese troops, 40,000 South Vietnamese troops and more than 58,000 U.S. troops.

Korean War (1950)

The narrative sold to the public by President Truman and newspapers was that ‘North Korea attacked South Korea under direct orders of the Soviet Union’. This, in fact, verified that the Soviets were beginning a worldwide takeover in the name of ‘Communism’.

In all respects, we were seeing a civil war yet this was marketed to the American public as a ‘defensive’ war where we were protecting the South Koreans from unjustified attack while also preventing the spread of communism.

The 'Communism' boogeyman was most notably effective as public opinion of the country was on the heels of McCarthyism and the Second Red Scare (1947 to 1956).

Casualties in Korea War: estimated 500,000 North Korean troops; 400,000 Chinese troops; 245,000 - 415,000 South Korean troops; 37,000 U.S. troops; and an estimated 2 million Korean civilians

World War I (1914)

Anyone who remembers their 7th grade history can recall the start of World War I. We memorized the key event surrounding the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand and learned how a web of treaties pulled the world into war. But the United States was free from entanglement until the sinking of the Lusitania.

Following the sinking of the Lusitania, newspapers beat the war drums by stirring American anger at the ‘murderous Germans’. What they failed to mention was that before the Lusitania set sail from New York, German Ambassadors received permission from the U.S. Secretary of State to take out large advertising sections of US newspapers warning Americans NOT to set sail on the Lusitania.

“Notice! Travellers intending to embark on the Atlantic voyage are reminded that a state of war exists between Germany and her allies and Great Britain and her allies; that the zone of war includes the waters adjacent to the British Isles; that, in accordance with formal notice given by the Imperial German Government, vessels flying the flag of Great Britain, or any of her allies, are liable to destruction in those waters and that travellers sailing in the war zone on the ships of Great Britain or her allies do so at their own risk. Imperial German Embassy Washington, D.C. 22 April 1915”

You see, the Lusitania was built to British Navy specifications and was classified as an auxiliary cruiser. That the Lusitania was carrying troops, ammo, and supplies of war was also no secret.

Amidst a campaign of German U-boats preventing similar cargo from reach England, the Lusitania was ordered through a known German submarine operating area while simultaneously ordering her escorts to leave her for another operational area.

The sinking and coinciding media blitzkrieg (pun intended) famously stirred up the public buy-in necessary to bring the U.S. into the war.

“The British and U.S. governments falsified the ship's manifests and lied so effectively that many people today imagine there is doubt over whether the Lusitania had weapons on board. Or they imagine that dive crews discovering arms in the wreckage of the ship in 2008 were resolving a long-standing mystery." [War Is A Lie, by David Swanson]

Remember, also, the premise of World War I was that the Kaiser HAD to be overthrown in Germany. We just couldn't have someone like him in power, anyone but him. 20 years later, Hitler.

American casualties in World War I: 117,000 service members

Which War Is Absent?

So where is World War II?

World War II was different. I don't advocate pacifism.

“Every normal man must be tempted, at times, to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats.”
― H.L. Mencken, Prejudices: First Series

Jason Stapleton's five principles are Free Markets, Individualism, Limited Government, Peace, and Tolerance.

Peace doesn't mean pacifism. When you are directly attacked, you respond with force. The government's only job is protection of life, liberty and property. This is what the military is for.

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, our response is to destroy them. We were successful by any measure.

Summary

I don't want any of the above to be seen as an argument FOR Saddam Hussein, FOR the Viet Cong, FOR Manuel Noriega, etc. These dictators are ruthless in their own right. They are pieces of shit. Got it.

But many of them were allies with United States until we found a need for war. We actually ASSISTED them in committing atrocities. At some point they became expendable and what followed was, many times, blatant propaganda, trickery, deception, and lies, in order to get public opinion to support a war.

For example, The United States and EU Nations had been arming and working with Muamar Gadaffi in Libya for years, until our "intervening” against him in 2011. U.S. and British intelligence agencies had worked with Gadaffi's torturers and killers many times in the past.

Gadaffi had given up his nuclear program at our behest.

His subsequent fate (sodomized, butchered, and drug naked through the streets), along with the fate of Hussein in Iraq unfortunately sends a strong message to other nations who are already inclined to believe that only nuclear weapons will protect them.

Once again, U.S. intervention in an attempt to elicit regime change and make the world a better place resulted in secondary and tertiary effects, causing more harm, damage and lives lost.

MORE FROM LIBERTYLOL:

0 Comments