Click pic to watch the video
This is one hour long episode from a series from the BBC on how the whole concept of politics has changed from governing to selling ideas that can be used to control the populace.
Want an example?
I wonder if any of the presidential candidates have watched this show. I wonder if anyone will ask them about the concept in one of the ‘debates.’ I wonder how quickly an audience member would be arrested if he asked about them.
For Kindle and with free ePub version. Only $9.49 Great reading.
Here is what Gary Shapiro CEO of the Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) said: Dvorak's writing sings with insight and clarity. Whether or not you agree with John's views, he will get you thinking and is never boring. These essays are worth the read!
Subscribe to Main Blog feed here:
Subscribe to Comments too (below):
Bad Behavior has blocked 5016 access attempts in the last 7 days.
Great find. I was also able to download the video before George Bush takes it down.
Christ, the holiday video tapes, maps and tourist books that they used as flimsy evidence to connect those guys to the boogie man was just desperate. The real terrorists is the west killing of innocent muslims around the world.
Remember that in the UK the BBC are the not the only, but certainly the main media outlet of goverment propoganda tactics and more often to none, straight up bullshit.
Dont ever believe any BBC headline you come accross, they twist things to the extreme and are at the centre of government coverups that would likely not work if it were not for their cooperation.
Google ‘Zeitgeist’ and watch it and you will be on your way to understanding.
FUK THE BBC!
….. innocent muslims around the world.
hahahahahahahahahaha
That’s a good one!
#4 Not counting Afghanistan, the pre-invasion on Iraq , the torture at Abu Ghraib and like places, the Palestinians and so on, John Hopkins researchers have estimated the post-invasion death toll by 2006 at about 655,000. I don’t find that funny at all. You might, but I don’t.
Check the list
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ho/pubs/fs/5902.htm
Do you see a trend?
Innocent my ass.
#6 A link to the US state department. Wow, I guess that makes those 655,000 + Muslim deaths at the hands of the US justified in your mind.
By the way, that list includes all religions
”Sikh terrorists seized the Golden Temple in Amritsar, India. One hundred people died when Indian security forces retook the Sikh holy shrine”
and
“A bomb destroyed an Air India Boeing 747 over the Atlantic, killing all 329 people aboard. Both Sikh and Kashmiri terrorists were blamed for the attack. Two cargo handlers were killed at Tokyo airport, Japan, when another Sikh bomb exploded in an Air Canada aircraft en route to India.”
and
“Catalan separatists bombed a Barcelona bar frequented by U.S. servicemen, resulting in the death of one U.S. citizen.”
and so on.
The trend is US foreign policy since WW 2.
The BBC is the only independent news source in much of the World, which I honestly believe does try to keep a middle ground perspective on issues, which immediately makes it an enemy of every extremist viewpoint. When the US is able to provide a news source which is regarded as slightly less biased than North Korea’s, then maybe viewers will take them seriously, too.
The link regarding Bush’s speech is an appeal to countries to stop terrorists from festering in their country and to put pressure on Iran to do the same. Frankly, governments have *always* been responsible to ensure that their people do not engage in attacks against other countries.
What exactly do you mean by “governing”? Are not ideas crucial to effective government (along with everything else) and has that not always been the case?
Regarding the video, it’s a steaming pile of manure. It is made by people with the “sit around the campfire singing kumbayah” mentality towards foreign policy. “With the American government and the radical Islamics marginilized during the 1990’s”. What dribble. Radical Islamics have never cared what the rest of the world thinks of them beyond what furthers their goals and how exactly is a country elevated to the last remaining super power marginalized?
Sorry Dylan
More leftist fiction.
http://tinyurl.com/2qpcbn
http://tinyurl.com/2wzeej
#10
No, just more propaganda spin to dismiss and hide the truth. Does it ease your conscious?
http://www.counterpunch.org/andrew01122008.html
So, your retort to the use of propaganda spin is to use propaganda spin?
Well…I watched the last hour of the 3 hour series and I have to say it makes sense. With all of the surveillance our government is engaging in, why haven’t we caught any prosecutable terrorists?
Why have there not been any more major terrorist strikes?
If the gov did catch any legitimate terrorists don’t you think they would trot them out for us all to see and heap scorn upon?
The point of the BBC series is that our gov needs a bogie man to keep us all in fear. It is to their benefit to have an enemy.
Using war as a means to peace is inane. Peace is achieved through diplomacy and negotiation. The very small group of terrorists are not worth spit and we have pushed them into a position of power on the world’s stage.
And Thomas if you want to use a word make sure you know what the word means. I think you were looking to use drivel as opposed to dribble. Dribble is what a 3 year old does with an adult glass. Drivel is what W spouts.
“Their findings, based on the most orthodox sampling methodology and published in the Lancet after extensive peer review, estimated the post-invasion death toll by 2006 at about 655,000. Predictably, this shocking assessment drew howls of ignorant abuse from self-interested parties, including George Bush (“not credible”) and Tony Blair.”
“published in the Lancet after extensive peer review”
VS
George Bush (a person who lies) and corporate owned news that doesn’t report the truth.
I have history on my side.
#13
While “drivel” would have probably been more appropriate, “dribble” is not completely off. To wit from the Random House dictionary: “1. to fall or flow in drops or small quantities; trickle. 2. to drivel; slaver.”
Regarding the video:
There are many reasons why a terrorist would not have been publicly displayed not the least of which is that they may be detained to gather more information. However, that said, captures are in fact evident as shown by the people in Guantanamo and other facilities. Furthermore, one of the huge differences in the way that Bush Administration is treating terrorists from the way the Clinton Administration treated them, is that Bush is not treating them like criminals but instead prisoners-of-war. Thus, there is no court to which they will be brought since they are simply captured soldiers.
Regarding terrorist attacks, did it ever occur to you that one of the reasons why there have been no further terrorist acts (in the US or UK) might be that the corrections and additional powers given to the intelligence communities have been used to good effect?
> Using war as a means to peace is inane.
> Peace is achieved through diplomacy
> and negotiation
That is more of the kumbayah foreign policy. So, by your logic, we should have never gone to war with Hitler, the Kaiser or the British? There are times when fighting is necessary for long term peace. Thus, there are times when war as a means to [long-term] peace is not at all inane.
#14
So, then that would be yes, you used propaganda spin to retort the use of propaganda spin.
NO, go back and read #14
#6 Here is a list for you. http://www.nogw.com/warcrimes.html
Thomas, well let’s see…the so called terrorists in Gitmo are nothing of the sort until evidence is presented to prove what they are. Our government has imprisoned people before for no particular reason other than to make a point. One such was the Japanese during WW2. Without a trial to prove their guilt or innocence they are just detainees.
I will concede that maybe the so-called intelligence community has gotten off their collective asses and started paying attention.
But it does still appear the “threat” is not as threatening as they would have us believe. The number of people killed by terrorists is small compared to the numbers that die from poverty, hunger, disease, our troops in Iraq, etc.
There is a way to equate Hitler with Bin Laden? Interesting….I personally don’t think that I have seen Bin Laden invade any countries yet. Maybe I missed that news story. I haven’t seen BL’s troops goose stepping through the streets of Paris. He has no troops! He has no network of sleeper cells. It is all BS!
I do believe that terrorists are a threat but not the threat our gov wants us to believe. Look at how the “Communist Threat” was blown out of proportion by people like McCarthy. He used it to push his own agenda. Just as Bush and his ilk use this threat to push their agenda.
Bush’s use of the POW blanket is a ruse. It is another tool to allow him to do what he wants and to obfuscate the truth. Bush thinks he is the arm of God and will not stop until he gets his Armageddon.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article2094.htm
I suppose you consider this, written by an award winning journalist John Pilger, propaganda and I suppose you think the photo is a fake too. I bet Billm will get as laugh out of it anyway. And, you wonder why the world hates you.
#18
I did and my response still stands.
> the so called terrorists in Gitmo are
> nothing of
> the sort until evidence is presented to prove
> what they are.
Not true. It has never been the case that a country was required to provide evidence that personnel captured during a war were in fact soldiers. The situation at Manzanar was entirely different. Those were Americans, on American soil, who were summarily interned purely because they were Japanese. They were not captured on the battlefield nor in the midst of engaging in covert operations.
> But it does still appear the “threat” is
> not as threatening as they would have
> us believe.
If threats are diffused, then it will always be the case that they appear less threatening. The only way that could not be the case is if they are not diffused. It is true that the number of people killed by terrorists is small compared to the number of people killed by AIDS for example. Are we to wait until terrorists kill as many those that die of say hunger before we do something about it?
RE: Equating Hitler to bin Laden
I made no such comparison. My retort was specifically in regards to your claim that using war as a means to peace is inane.
RE: Communist threat
Actually, McCarthy was not wrong about the existence of a communist threat. From documents we received after the fall of the Soviet Union we now know that indeed they were trying to infiltrate and divide the country. Where McCarthy went wrong was his methods.
RE: Claiming terrorists to be POWs.
It is not a ruse. It is a different approach to the same problem that Clinton and Bush I were trying to solve and it has been effective. Where Bush’s method goes wrong in my opinion is in recent laws (which means Congress is culpable too) such as the Military Commissions Act which allow the government to arrest Americans with no due process.
#18
http://www.marchforjustice.com/4.27.php
Here’s more “propaganda” for you. This is the reality of the ” the war on terror” that you support.
By this:
“…purely because they were Japanese.”
I meant to say:
“…purely because they were of Japanese decent.”
#23 Made me laugh. all muslims must die. go USA
The war on terror is a never-ending war against organizations not aligned with any specific nation. Thus, treating all accused combatants in this war as “prisoners of war” instead of criminals not only takes away the rights they would be accorded as criminals, it allows us to effectively suspend some of the ordinary rights of warfare as well.
For instance, prisoners of war historically have been subject to release and repatriation upon cessation of hostilities. In the new war on terror, these “hostilities” will never end, both because the target is so non-specific (no country) and because the objective (wiping out terrorism) will never be accomplished. Does anyone imagine a president ever declaring an end to the war on terror, at which time the combatants can go home? As the self-declared sole superpower, we get to make the rules, and combatants can go home when we say so.
They did catch terrorists, they did stop plots, and they did trot them out, though perhaps not all. An attack on the Brooklyn Bridge was one such.
>selling ideas that can be used to control the populace.
Another special on global warming?
#9, Thomas,
What dribble. Radical Islamics have never cared what the rest of the world thinks of them beyond what furthers their goals
Gee, I think that would have sounded more accurate if it was written,
“What dribble. Neo-con Americans have never cared what the rest of the world thinks of them beyond what furthers their goals”.
#22, Thomas,
Actually, McCarthy was not wrong about the existence of a communist threat.
So when McCarthy held up a piece of paper saying that he “had the names of 218 communists working in the State Department”, he was correct? During the hearings when he outright called people “communists”, with no evidence, he was right? Where was this communist threat? Does anyone else know about it or just the Micro Economists?