9 out of 10 Propagandists Agree

I find this kind of story laughable:

One out of every five killers is an immigrant

"Up to a fifth of killers in England and Wales are foreign, police figures suggest. Out of 371 individuals accused or convicted of murder or manslaughter last year, 79 were from abroad - more than 21 per cent. 

Foreign immigrants make up only around a tenth of the UK population, meaning they are statistically twice as likely as native Britons to be charged with or found guilty of an illegal killing. 

In London, almost 40 per cent of those in such cases in the past year were from overseas, or of unknown origin. 

Opposition critics said the findings reflected the Government's failure to deport foreign criminals, and the ease with which offenders from abroad can slip through border controls. 

The most common nationality for foreigners involved in murder and manslaughter cases was Polish, followed by Nepalese, Lithuanian, Somalian and Sri Lankan."

"Foreign influence: Immigrants are twice as likely to commit or be charged with an illegal killing"

Goodness, NO!
1 out of 5!? That's... thats... wait.

Doesn't that mean that 4 out of 5 killers is a born-and-bred Briton?
Wow. Watch out for the British! Most will kill you as soon as look at you, according to "Mail Online" an, unsurprisingly, nationalist paper. Interesting how the 'source' of these percentages are incredible, unverifiable, "police figures".

This article is inflammatory, unsupported, and shotgun journalism. A strange and fumbled attempt at scapegoating.
Immigrants (illegal or no) have ever been the target of blame when social crises strike a beleagured populace.
It's an effective weapon in the propagandist's arsenal, and doubly effective because it's an easy tool to wield thanks to general ignorance.

In this age of border-crossing swine flu rhetoric, economic depressions, and healthcare woes, it's damnably easy to pin the blame on the voiceless. Hey, it's definitely worked in the past. Why not now?

Funny thing about scapegoating is it really only works on the people who wish it to be so - I like to hope the rest of us know better.

Announcement: Recession Over!

t's over. Nothing to see here. You can all go home.

Bernanke says recession 'very likely over'

"Bernanke's declaration that the recession likely ended marked his most optimistic assessment yet of the economy. And his remarks came on the same day that the government report that retail sales jumped 2.7 percent in August, the most in more than three years."
Article (AP)

"Don't Believe Anybody Who's Telling You 'The Recession is Over' "

Senator Sanders writes today:

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said, "it is very likely that the recession has ended."

Well, let me just suggest to Mr. Bernanke that today we have about 17 percent of our workforce - 26 million Americans - who are either unemployed, have given up looking for work because they no longer think a job is possible, or they are working part time when they want to work full time. That's 17 percent of our population.

For those folks, I don't think they believe this recession is over.

In fact, what they believe is that they are mired in the worst economic mess since the Great Depression.

One of the really disturbing statistics out there is that it is taking unemployed people a lot longer to find a job than used to be the case. On average, it's taking about six months.

But it's not just losing your job or working part time. People are losing health insurance, losing their homes, losing their pensions. What it's about is slipping out of the middle class and into poverty and not having the capability of sending your kids to college. That's what the economy is about today...

Don't believe anybody who's telling you "the recession is over."

Article from Washington'sBlog 

When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail. ~Pearl S. Buck

Uh oh. False flag alert!

U.S. says Iran nearing ability to make atom bombs Wed Sep 9, 5:58 am ET

(Reuters) – The United States said on Wednesday that Iran was moving closer to being able to make atomic bombs by stockpiling enriched uranium.

"We have serious concerns that Iran is deliberately attempting, at a minimum, to preserve a nuclear weapons option," U.S. envoy Glyn Davies told a meeting of the U.N. nuclear watchdog's 435-nation governing board.

"Iran is now either very near or in possession already of sufficient low-enriched uranium to produce one nuclear weapon if the decision were made to further enrich it to weapons-grade ... (This) moves Iran closer to a dangerous and destabilizing possible breakout capacity," Davies said.

Three paragraphs. That's all there are to this "story".

No supporting evidence. No International Atomic Energy Agency data to substantiate the claim. No note as to how the U.S. envoy is in any way an expert pertaining to the generation of nuclear energy, or an authority on potential attempts to make the step to producing weapons-grade, enriched uranium.

This is all just blather.

Extremely dangerous blather.

With all the evidence of Iran's supposed ambitions to the contrary, (Iran Nuclear Bomb Threat 'Has Been Hyped') ,(IAEA: Iran Not Capable of Making Nuclear Weapons)    it seems odd that the U.S. government would continue to  support this tenuous theory - conspiracy theory, in fact! Have they run out of bogeymen?


I don't see how ANYONE in their right mind can take any accusation against Iran seriously after the 'Iraq definitely, definitely, definitely has Weapons of Mass Destruction, we're totally not lying', lie.

So this rejuvenation of the stale idea of Iran's supposedly spiraling stockpile makes me think that either the same people that brought you 9/11 are needing a distraction from this health-care "debate" (which is escalating at a strange and ominous rate), the depression, the developing police state, the rampant unemployment, or the disappeared bailout monies - by replacing it with their traditional, fear based, state of union.

OR they need these stories to fabricate a 'we warned you' message for their upcoming false flag event. Nothing makes you stop whining about domestic issues more swiftly than a nuclear blast in your neighbourhood.

It is my opinion that if there is any such attack on a western nation blamed on Iran - it is false flag attack and to be pointed out as such immediately. That's my opinion based on the judgement of the globally accredited body that regulates and monitors nuclear energy production and armaments - the IAEA.

When the western powers can provide any arguments other than their own hyperbole, I'll worry about Iran. For the time being, though, I'll try to spread the word about the potential of another false flag attack.

With Us or Agin Us

A flattering review by Chris Rovzar of a speech by Clinton. Boorish bullying and maniacal posturing is so last season, Hil!

Clinton’s ‘Muscular’ Foreign-Policy Manifesto

In a speech this afternoon at the Council on Foreign Relations, Hillary Clinton will take the opportunity to make it clear to the world that though the Obama administration may try to finesse America's way into better relations with the rest of the world, it doesn't mean we've forgotten how to exert our strength. "We will remain clear-eyed about our purpose," she will say, according to a transcript obtained by Politico, which called the address "muscular." "Not everybody in the world wishes us well or shares our values and interests," she continued. "Some will seek to undermine our efforts. In those cases, our partnerships will help constrain or deter their actions." To the people who would be America's foes, she had this to say:

"And to these foes and would-be foes, let me say: You should know that our focus on diplomacy and development is not an alternative to our national security arsenal. You should never see America’s willingness to talk as a sign of weakness to be exploited. We will not hesitate to defend our friends and ourselves vigorously when necessary with the world’s strongest military. This is not an option we seek. Nor is it a threat; it is a promise to the American people."

In her sweeping address on Obama's and her foreign-policy agenda, she listed the following goals: to isolate terrorists, counter extremism, reach out to Muslims, pursue economic recovery, expand trade, achieve peace in the Middle East, combat climate change, support democracies, and stand up for human rights. You know, the easy stuff. As ambitious as this sounded, she issued a stern reminder to the rest of the world, which will likely be the speech's takeaway:

"Just as no nation can meet these challenges alone, no challenge can be met without America."

Muscular indeed.

Article

Nice try, but the rest of the world has caught on to your one weakness - you're a fallen empire, and we don't wanna invite you to the really cool parties anymore.

*shun*

I wouldn't say this is necessarily so much propaganda as it is simple nationalism, but I thought it was a strange stance to take - but I suppose she's the hammer to Obama's nail (straight into our skulls).

Also interesting that this speech was delivered to the Council on Foreign Relations. As if THEY need reminding of their goals. Preachin to the converted, girly!

So if that's the case, then this speech was not necessarily for them, but to another audience. And in a time where a softer track is being laid, albeit nefariously, it's a clear message to those who would doubt; The sign in the window reads:

"Business as usual, fuckers."

Casual Lies and Conversations

"He did apologise for the Spanish Inquisition. He said it was far too inquisitive. Supposed to be the Spanish Casual Chat." ~Eddie Izzard

FBI Interviews: Hussein Lied About WMD Out of Fear of Iran

"Saddam Hussein let the world believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because he did not want to appear weak to Iran, according to the Washington Post.

In interviews with the FBI before he was hanged, the former Iraqi president also denounced Usama bin Laden as "a zealot" and said the United States was not Iraq's enemy, the Post reports.

In fact, he claimed, he felt so vulnerable to the threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [Iraq] from threats in the region," according to declassified accounts of the interviews released on Wednesday and published in the Washington Post.

George W. Bush, supported by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, ordered the invasion of Iraq six years ago on the grounds that Hussein's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction, despite the failure of U.N. weapons inspectors to uncover any such weapons."

(article...)

Grade A, 100% pure, seedless, bull. shit.

You have to be impressed, however, with the spin that the friendly friends at Fox News and Friends put on this one. I cannot tell if it's sloppy or cunning...

Not only was it HUSSEIN who"lied" repeatedly (not the American government), and not only was it HUSSEIN "let the world believe" he had WMD, but also IRAN is partially to blame for this because of their "fanatical leaders".

None of the last 8 years have been the fault of W. Bush, Cheney, Powell, H.W Bush, Rumsfeld, Tennet, or any of their scream-team. All along it has been Saddam Hussein and Iran.

THEY lied. THEY misled. THEY are insane, psychopathic, warmongers.

The lies by Fox News in general and the ultimate source of the article, The Times, specifically, are so obvious and gratuitous that the only ones convinced by them must be people who possess no critical thinking skills in any form. They're so blatant as to be insulting.

I appreciate a little refinement in my propaganda, thankyou!

The message here is that Hussein was a baddie and he lied. There were WMD, but he's dead, so it's all not so bad, right? Furthermore, Hussein, now dead, wasn't such a bad guy after all, if you stop and think about it, because he was enemies with the dreaded Osama bin Laden! (I wish everyone would decide on a spelling.)

Also, if Iran worried Hussein (devil incarnate), then Iran should scare the SHIT out of you.

Be afraid of Iran - heck, just be afraid of everything, really.

Beyond the coercive and worrisome language used in the article, they've also made ominous references to Saddam's "interviews with FBI".

I'm sure glad I wasn't in Saddam's shoes during these 'interviews', knowing what we know about the US government endorsing, and participating in, torture.

And with the knowledge that torture gains you nothing of value intel-wise, we can safely assume that anything revealed during these interviews are about as truthful and reliable as the Times article.

Now that's a thought - perhaps The Times and Fox News have taken to torturing their reporters. You know, that would explain a LOT.

Very interesting link:

Hussein Interrogation Interviews

You'll find such gems as:

• FBI special agents carried out 20 formal interviews and at least 5 "casual conversations" with former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein after his capture by U.S. troops in December 2003
• Saddam denied any connections to the "zealot" Osama bin Laden
• He cited North Korea as his most likely ally in a crunch
• He shared President George W. Bush's hostility towards the "fanatic" Iranian mullahs

I think he shares more with George W. than stated in the interrogations.

Several good points are made on the body of the article found at the National Security Archive piece (incredibly).

"Saddam does not provide comfort to his interlocutors on these matters, refuting any notion of collaboration with al-Qaeda, or of a remaining WMD capacity, and in reality the charges, meant to win public support for the invasion of Iraq, were collapsing while the interviews were underway. Investigators from the CIA, operating freely in occupied Iraq, failed to uncover any credible supporting evidence for the U.S. claims, and ultimately President Bush himself acknowledged that “most of the intelligence turned out to be wrong.”

Apparently the FBI had 'casual conversations' with Saddam.

I go to the Post Office and have 'casual conversations' about the weather. Not ONCE have I had an in-depth discussion about the repurcussions of 9/11 as relating to Iraq and the options that Saddam had on the table at the time, with the guy behind the counter. That would no longer be considered 'casual'. Infact, I might not be welcomed back at the Post Office should I start talking about these things.

Just another instance where you see how the FBI and those in national security view the world. "Casual conversation" indeed.

Glenn Beck Hates Your Freedom

Well.

You don't have to look very far to find propaganda all around you.

These gentlemen (and I use the term loosely) make the hairs on the back of my neck raise. The pure and unadulterated ability to fabricate hate and ideology at will must be a useful tool. They say things that make blood curdle and babies cry.

They possess such venom against something they either don't understand, or worse, that they wish to see eviscerated on the altar of "American Freedom TM ®".

During the 'Fox News Interview' (newspeak for verbal diarrhea), the players on the stage are Shakespearean in their scope. No grand, sweeping gesture is left out, no sensational statements omitted, to ensure the fullest dispersion of bullshit possible.

I found this clip thanks to PrisonPlanet.com, because I never actually watch Fox News. I don't have the channel on my satellite TV, and I won't be getting it - not because the blood fests wouldn't be entertaining on some levels, but because I can see myself hunkered down behind the couch in the darkness of the living room, the only light being the draining, harsh glare of the TV turned to FoxNews, the shrieking harbingers of doom spoiling my brain and making me gouge out my eyes with my thumbs and ram sharpened pencils through my eardrums to stop the pain... the paaaaiin...

Needless to say, I don't watch.

Let's see what Glenn Beck is saying to me:

"One of the groups I've been warning about for a VERY long time are these 9/11 truthers."

As well he should. Nothing that has to do with either 9/11 OR truth could be very helpful for his career, such as it is.

"The information that we have at this point is that this guy is a HERO in the 9/11 Truther community."

Hold up one second, chief. Your unsited sources of information I'll let slide only because they're probably so bogus and ridiculous that you wouldn't be able to back up your claim no matter how hard you tried - but the dropping of the HERO bomb is unacceptable.

He has no way to substantiate the lies, and yet he says these things with such authority that it's no wonder that people are confused and scared of this bogeyman-like 9/11 truth movement. A Hero? THE HERO?

The distorted logic here is it just shows what type of people seek 9/11 Truth when they have heroes that shoot and kill random unfortunates! He is a monster, and THEY are monsters!

(I would like to say that I've been well aware of the comings and goings of the movement for about two years now, and *I* certainly have never heard of this James Von Brunn, let alone consider him a 'hero').

"Don't know whether it's true or not, that is the early report."

A nice way to stickhandle your way out of taking responsibility for inflammatory suggestions. Plus it adds weight to your character, displaying that you're unbiased and willing to change your story should new facts arise.

Of course, it's all manipulation, but they don't pay him for nothing.

"These are whacked-out conspiracy - the government has planned 9/11, the jews were involved, etc. etc." "This guy is being held up as somebody they liked because he'll actually do something about it."

Hmm. Simple 'demonization of the enemy' propaganda tactics here wherein you make ' individuals from an opposing nation, from a different ethnic group, or those who support an opposing viewpoint appear to be subhuman.

Don't forget the blatant accusation of anti-semitism, the favourite callsign of the indignant propagandist wielding 'reductio ad Hitlerum'. This technique is used to persuade a target audience to disapprove of an action or idea by suggesting that the idea is popular with groups hated, feared, or held in contempt by the target audience.

I find it ironic when his co-host suggests that 'crazy hate doesn't know any bounds.' Well said, and too true, FoxNews purveyor of filth.

The co-host suggests at one point that the 9/11 Truth movement lauds the psychopathic killer, Von Brunn like the 'celebrating muslims' cheering on the day of 9/11.

"Like Al'Qaeda, they'd like to destroy us, and will work with anyone"; Connecting terror, Al Qaeda and 9/11 truthers together in a web where one works with and is inseparable from the other, so if you have questions about 9/11, you're evil, and at least a terrorist, if not the destroyer of worlds.

He ends the clip with a full frontal face that brooks no room for argument. You're either with him, or you're a terrorist. How does one deal with terrorists? With lethal force.

"9/11 Truthers would like to destroy the country".

9/11 Truthers are going to destroy the country with their questions...

Would it be the questions that destroyed America?

Or the answers.

***

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

~Mahatma Gandhi

We're in stage 3, and it's a rough ride, but good ol Gandhi at least sees light at the end of the tunnel. And I do too. All we have to do is keep seeing through what they throw at us.

What They're NOT Telling You

I entitled this blog Manipulati: What They're Telling You, because I was sick of heart. I was demoralized by the (oh, lets just say it) inhumane corporate news media's lack of ethics and their continuous lies and obfuscations. I learned to read what they DO tell you to therefore suss out what they're not. Also, you can tell what they WANT you to think by their reporting, and can try to piece together the truth from their oftentimes obvious machinations.

Even though it is a phenomenon that feels recent, history suggest it was ever thus. I suppose I never noticed until now -whether it was revealed due to their increasingly blatant attempts to control, or simply my naivety being forced to maturity after 9/11 - but I definitely started to notice.

But in this instance, it's not 'What They're Telling You', it's what they AREN'T.

I learned of Project Censored about two years ago, and I really value their ethics, their integrity, their investigative journalism, and their willingness to follow stories where they LEAD - not just to where it's convenient for their message.

I highly recommend their site and books, as it's a good way to stay abreast of the stories that are purposefully left out of the mainstream so the public doesn't stir itself.

There is so much that is purposefully left out of public discourse so that we might not draw conclusions and actually.. I dunno.. DO something about these issues.

It is the worst fear of the controlling bodies of the world, and thus it is our free and clear thinking minds that we must retain at all costs, and see THROUGH the lies and the propaganda so we might change the state of reality and make it our own.