pushing lies at us

.. the truth ...

  .. the whole truth ...

    .. or nothing like the truth?

Thesis/Subtitle: democratic voters delegate their sovereignty to representatives ...

Concomitant: who implement the will of the majority without disadvantaging minorities ...

Corollary: the above process *cannot work* in the presence of lies


Preamble: It is easy enough to prove that our democracies are not working properly (massive understatement), see the preamble to my "democracy as practiced in 'the West' does not work." Looking at just one failure-mode, consider lies.


Here is an AusBC lie (ibid. "unimaginable *horror* by US"):

  «World leaders are worried about a repeat of other massacres in Syria this year, after government troops slaughtered civilians in the towns of Taramseh, Houla, Homs, and Kubeir, among others.» 
[AusBC/'news' July 29, 2012 05:31:44]

Comment 1: There is more than enough information available, in the public domain (thnx FAZ), to *totally* contradict the statement "government troops slaughtered civilians in ... Houla." Any departure from the truth is a lie[1], and since the AusBC are supposed 'professionals,' all such lies must be *deliberate*.

Comment 2: *One* lie is enough to destroy *all* credibility. ('One?' - squillions!) Once credibility is gone, *all* statements (here AusBC 'news') fall under suspicion. Ergo, since none of the rest of the AusBC's *allegations* have been proven, all such must be in doubt. They even cynically cover themselves: 'reports ... could not be confirmed.'

Comment 3: Since we, the people need "the truth, the whole truth and *nothing but* the truth," this *outright lie* from the AusBC is a) proof of the AusBC's perfidy, and since the AusBC is a publicly-financed broadcaster (PFBC), is b) proof of the Aus-govt.'s perfidy as well (otherwise the govt. would stop the AusBC from lying to us, eh?) Repeated lies lead to dumbing-down = ppp-dd'd voters = can't think, let alone vote 'straight.'

QED - but there's more = AusBC 'gilding the lily.'


AusBC has taken to repeatedly including photos, here 'Gallery: War in Syria' - consider this google ""A member of the Free Syrian Army takes aim through a hole in a wall as he takes up a defensive position" site:abc.net.au/"
(About 25 results)

Q: What's 'defensive' about aggressively attacking from cover?

The 1st 10 'hits:'

Rebels forced out of strategic Aleppo suburb - ABC News ...
Taking aim - ABC News (earliest mention listed; 19 Jul 2012)
War in Syria - ABC News
Syrians want embassy staff accepted as refugees - ABC News ...
Syrian army declares Damascus retaken as Aleppo pounded - ABC
Syrian rebels accused of public executions - ABC News
UN slams Security Council's Syria failure - ABC News
Annan quits amid Damascus execution claims - ABC News ...
Obama signed deal to support rebels: reports - ABC News
Syrian destiny rests on Aleppo battle: Assad - ABC News

Q: Why do we need to see these photos, over and over, in often unrelated articles?

Then this google "libya sniper site:abc.net.au/"
(About 346 results)

Q: Why do we need to read about this, over and over?

And this google "syria sniper site:abc.net.au/"
(About 1,160 results)

Q: Why do we need to read about this, over and over?

A (to all 3 Qs): 'A lie, if repeated often enough, ...' is the *operating principle* here; “The English (as the US/Zs, also BBC, then 'Aunty'-AusBC = all related) follow the principle that when one lies, one should lie big, and stick to it. They keep up their lies, even at the risk of looking ridiculous.”


Note on snipers: Snipers work from cover; by definition one can't see them - unless perhaps, they are 'amateur' snipers. They also use high-power, *high-accuracy* weapons. It means that anyone shot/killed by a sniper was a consciously selected target. Q: How much sense would it make, for Assad-commanded snipers to shoot unarmed civilians = 'killing his own people;' *why* and Cui bono? On the other hand, if malevolent, psychopathic mercenaries, bent on causing trouble *for Assad* could do so by killing innocents then attempting to blame it on Assad, that would work well - just ask the AusBC, for that is *exactly* what the AusBC reports imply.

IMHO, IF snipers active THEN most likely US(F+UK&TR)NATO-sponsored death-squads.


More quotes:

“... about the use of a lie so "colossal" that no one would believe that someone "could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously."”

“... Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. ... the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.”

Me; AND/OR: Demonise the 'enemy.'

“... The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country.”

Note: Consider an "invisible government" - a "manipulated" democracy is 'improper' = sham.


Fazit: No worthwhile project needs an attempted 'lie-disguise'. At an absolute minimum, lies are deployed to deceive; just who needs to be deceived? Worse, lies are pre- and post-requisites to criminality, if only to avoid self-incrimination. Sometimes, it really is simple: IF lie THEN criminal.


PS From NYT "Today's Headlines: Crime Wave Engulfs Syria as Its Cities Reel From War" - oh, goody. The 'rebels,' having been defeated in both Damascus & Aleppo, then come back and start looting; just like the 'good little criminals' that they are.

PPS Those who foment (NED), those who subvert (CIA), those who support invaders (CIA again, psychopathic killers for hire = mercenaries being recruited, transported, trained then smuggled into Syria via Turkey), those who arm insurgents (Saudi Arabia, Qatar etc.) - are *all* guilty of criminality, perhaps more so since they (the whole lot, including pseudo-rebels) are the *attackers*, the root-cause of all the disgusting death and destruction. See photo below.



[1] lie2  —n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. —v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English] [POD]

[2] propaganda  n. 1 organized propagation of a doctrine by use of publicity, selected information, etc. 2 usu. derog. ideas etc. so propagated.  propagandist n. & adj. propagandize v. (also -ise) (-zing or -sing). [Latin: related to *propagate] [ibid.]

[3] improper  adj. 1 unseemly; indecent. 2 inaccurate, wrong.  improperly adv. [ibid.]


ELO/Os = hapless erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; reparation = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament), 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-CCC = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe

A rebel sniper; *not* with an AK-47; note 'scope & detail - NATO issue, perhaps?

How would you like *your* house to look like this?

No comments:

Post a Comment