posted on May 24, 2002 12:22:21 PM new
An interesting application. LOL
May 24, 2002 9:33 am EST
BERLIN (Reuters) - An irreverent left-leaning German newspaper published a
blank front page on Friday under the headline "Bush's historic speech" to
mock the U.S. president's address in the Reichstag on Thursday.
The Tageszeitung, a leading voice for left-wing critics of George W. Bush's
policies throughout Germany, said in a page three editorial the advance
billing that the speech to parliament in Berlin would be "historic" was far
off the mark.
"Bush didn't have to come to Berlin for this speech," the Berlin-based
Tageszeitung wrote. "What he said yesterday he's already said often enough
in Washington. Most Europeans hope that a war can be avoided. Bush's visit
to Berlin didn't contribute a single bit to his understanding."
Bush, confronted by big anti-American protests in Berlin over U.S. policies
ranging from Iraq to the environment, warned that the United States and its
18 fellow NATO members were vulnerable to more attacks like those of
September 11.
Bush also used the speech to the German parliament to reassure European
allies that Washington remained a friend despite major differences over
Iraq, trade and the environment.
LOL! I tried to find a picture of that newspaper! What a creative idea to use a blank page to represent nothing said. I understand he tried to do as well as Kennedy, Reagan and Churchill. HaHaHa!!!
There is a firestorm coming, and it is being provoked by Mr Bush
So now Osama bin Laden is Hitler. And Saddam Hussein is Hitler. And George Bush is fighting the Nazis. Not since Menachem Begin fantasised to President Reagan that he felt he was attacking Hitler in Berlin his Israeli army was actually besieging Beirut, killing thousands of civilians, "Hitler" being the pathetic Arafat have we had to listen to claptrap like this. But the fact that we Europeans had to do so in the Bundestag on Thursday and, for the most part, in respectful silence was extraordinary.
I'm reminded of the Israeli columnist who, tired of the wearying invocation of the Second World War to justify yet more Israeli brutality, began an article with the words: "Mr Prime Minister, Hitler is dead." Must we, forever, live under the shadow of a war that was fought and won before most of us were born? Do we have to live forever with living, diminutive politicians playing Churchill (Thatcher and, of course, Blair) or Roosevelt? "He's a dictator who gassed his own people," Mr Bush reminded us for the two thousandth time, omitting as always to mention that the Kurds whom Saddam viciously gassed were fighting for Iran and that the United States, at the time, was on Saddam's side.
But there is a much more serious side to this. Mr Bush is hoping to corner the Russian President, Vladimir Putin, into a new policy of threatening Iran. He wants the Russians to lean on the northern bit of the "axis of evil", the infantile phrase which he still trots out to the masses. More and more, indeed, Mr Bush's rhetoric sounds like the crazed videotapes of Mr bin Laden. And still he tries to lie about the motives for the crimes against humanity of 11 September. Yet again, in the Bundestag, he insisted that the West's enemies hated "justice and democracy", even though most of America's Muslim enemies wouldn't know what democracy was.
In the United States, the Bush administration is busy terrorising Americans. There will be nuclear attacks, bombs in high-rise apartment blocks, on the Brooklyn bridge, men with exploding belts note how carefully the ruthless Palestinian war against Israeli colonisation of the West Bank is being strapped to America's ever weirder "war on terror" and yet more aircraft suiciders. If you read the words of President Bush, Vice-President Dick Cheney and the ridiculous national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, over the past three days, you'll find they've issued more threats against Americans than Mr bin Laden.
But let's get back to the point. The growing evidence that Israel's policies are America's policies in the Middle East or, more accurately, vice versa is now being played out for real in statements from Congress and on American television. First, we have the chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee announcing that Hizbollah the Lebanese guerrilla force that drove Israel's demoralised army out of Lebanon in the year 2000 is planning attacks in the US. After that, we had an American television network "revealing" that Hizbollah, Hamas and al- Qa'ida Mr bin Laden's organisation have held a secret meeting in Lebanon to plot attacks on the US.
American journalists insist on quoting "sources" but there was, of course, no sourcing for this balderdash, which is now repeated ad nauseam in the American media. Then take the "Syrian Accountability Act" that was introduced into the US Senate by Israel's friends on18 April. This includes the falsity uttered earlier by Israel's Foreign Minister, Shimon Peres, that Iranian Revolutionary Guards "operate freely" on the southern Lebanese border. Now there haven't been Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon let alone the south of the country for 18 years. So why is this lie repeated yet again?
Iran is under threat. Lebanon is under threat. Syria is under threat its "terrorism" status has been heightened by the State Department and so is Iraq. But Ariel Sharon, the Israeli Prime Minister held personally responsible by Israel's own enquiry for the Sabra and Shatila massacre of 1,700 Palestinians in Beirut in 1982, is according to Mr Bush "a man of peace". How much further can this go? A long way, I fear.
The anti-American feeling throughout the Middle East is palpable. Arab newspaper editorials don't come near to expressing public opinion. In Damascus, Majida Tabbaa has become famous as the lady who threw the US Consul Roberto Powers out of her husband's downtown restaurant on 7 April . "I went over to him," she said, "and told him, 'Mr Roberto, tell your George Bush that all of you are not welcome please get out'." Across the Arab world, boycotts of American goods have begun in earnest.
How much longer can this go on? America praises Pakistani President Musharraf for his support in the "war on terror", but remains silent when he arranges a dictatorial "referendum" to keep him in power. America's enemies, remember, hate the US for its "democracy". So is General Musharraf going to feel the heat? Forget it. My guess is that Pakistan's importance in the famous "war on terror" or "war for civilisation" as, we should remember, it was originally called is far more important. If Pakistan and India go to war, I'll wager a lot that Washington will come down for undemocratic Pakistan against democratic India.
Across the former Soviet southern Muslim republics, America is building air bases, helping to pursue the "war on terror" against any violent Muslim Islamist groups that dare to challenge the local dictators. Please do not believe that this is about oil. Do not for a moment think that these oil and gas-rich lands have any economic importance for the oil-fuelled Bush administration. Nor the pipelines that could run from northern Afghanistan to the Pakistani coast if only that pesky Afghan loya jirga could elect a government that would give concessions to Unocal, the oddly named concession whose former boss just happens to be a chief Bush "adviser" to Afghanistan.
Now here's pause for thought. Abdelrahman al-Rashed writes in the international Arabic daily Asharq al-Awsat that if anyone had said prior to 11 September that Arabs were plotting a vast scheme to murder thousands of Americans in the US, no one would have believed them. "We would have charged that this was an attempt to incite the American people against Arabs and Muslims," he wrote. And rightly so.
But Arabs did commit the crimes against humanity of 11 September. And many Arabs greatly fear that we have yet to see the encore from the same organisation. In the meantime, Mr Bush goes on to do exactly what his enemies want; to provoke Muslims and Arabs, to praise their enemies and demonise their countries, to bomb and starve Iraq and give uncritical support to Israel and maintain his support for the dictators of the Middle East.
Each morning now, I awake beside the Mediterranean in Beirut with a feeling of great foreboding. There is a firestorm coming. And we are blissfully ignoring its arrival; indeed, we are provoking it.
posted on May 28, 2002 08:33:08 PM new
This is a site that I thought presented a good synopsis of the major methods of propaganda, and toward the end, twisted logic. From time to time the topics in these threads cause me to search and review information on the internet that I've studied previously in paper texts, as well as to search out information in investigating new areas. This site would be a good one to bookmark if you enjoy learning more about propaganda. I think that one of the great failings of the educational system is that so little time and attention is given to this type of study.
posted on May 28, 2002 10:10:33 PM new
Well, I gather that you REALLY don't like Robert Fisk. LOL!
If I still had the option to edit the article, I would remove it for you.
I studied a little propaganda in Journalism 101 and I will review the link that you have provided. Maybe I will learn something.
I was the news editor on my high school paper and the copy editor (can you believe it? lol) on the University of Maryland Diamondback newspaper for a couple of years. I dealt mostly with straight news...not feature type articles and certainly not propaganda. I'll review the article again tomorrow and try to locate what you believe is propaganda.
posted on May 28, 2002 10:34:28 PM new
I had no problems with the article, Helen and thought that it fit well in describing the European reaction to Bush's speech. What rekindled my interest in propaganda was the administration's PR about the greatness of the speech and then some of the excerpts from the speech itself that I read.
Though I'm aware that most of the information that we receive attempts to manipulate us in some way, occasionally something strikes me in such a light that the sheer volume with which we are confronted seems overwhelming. As I was thinking about this problem in the Information Age, I decided to see what I could find on the internet about propaganda, etc., and one of the sites had the presentation that I linked above, because I thought that it was especially well-done. But
I didn't intend any direct correlation to your article.
posted on May 28, 2002 10:55:34 PM new
"I saw newspaper reports which did not bear
any relation to the facts ... I saw great battles
reported where there had been no fighting, and
complete silence where hundreds of men had
been killed ... I saw, in fact, history being written
not in terms of what happened but of what ought
to have happened according to various 'party
lines.'"
George Orwell,
Looking Back on the Spanish War
posted on May 28, 2002 11:18:46 PM new
Antiquery - Nice link. Now change the title to advertising and go back through and see if you can find anything that can't be found in some form!
posted on May 28, 2002 11:31:30 PM new
Gravid, yes, in many instances advertising works, as does religion, and public relations, etc., which is what I was thinking with the choice of words, "that most of the information that we receive attempts to manipulate us in some way."
Even chatboard discussions.
I was half asleep last night when I replied to you. I had my first opportunity to use your link this morning on the SWITCH article with amazing results! Now, I'm on my way to get a new printer cartridge so that I can hang it on the wall as a reference.
I was unconscious for awhile yesterday because of a diabetic insulin reaction and my thinking was probably not up to par for the rest of the day. About once every 7 years I lose consciousness completely so that food cannot be used to raise my blood sugar levels. Fortunately, my husband was here to give me a shot of glucagon. I strongly advise anyone with diabetes to have this medication available in case of an emergency.
So, please excuse me if I misinterpreted your comment. I'm usually sane, but not always. LOL!
