Before you answer, let me ask you a few preliminary questions --
Do you believe that the United States was struck by terrorist attacks on Sept. 11th and do you think that the people behind the attacks were "Arabs"? Do you believe that the mastermind of the attacks was this fellow, Osama bin Laden, operating from a cave in Afghanistan? Do you think that the only way to stop terrorism is to hit the terrorists hard, hit them at their "bases", in such remote places of the world like Afghanistan, and attack any nation who might sponsor them, like Iraq?
And what about the economy? Do you think that the recent fall of the stock market and the weakness in our economy have been directly caused by the Sept. 11th attacks? Ready to see how well you did? If you answered *yes* to any of these questions, you are most likely brainwashed. If you answered *yes* to more than one, or heaven forbid, all of them, you are definitely a goner and are hereby granted the title of *Imbecile*.
But, you reply, "Isn't that what most people think? Wouldn't they answer those questions the same way that I do?" The answer to that is, yes. But we would remind you: Just because the "majority" of people BELIEVE something to be true, does not make it true! All that it means is that you and most of your friends and neighbors are suffering from "mass delusion" - or to put it bluntly: YOU ARE BRAINWASHED. So, the question is, how did you get this way? How did you come to believe that the statements in the questions we just asked you were true? "Well, I heard it on - Well, I saw it on - Well, I read it in ..."
You needn't bother finishing those statements; we can do it for you: You and your friends and neighbors were told the "truth" by the mass media. The American news media, which is so proud of calling itself "free" and has been continually patting itself on its back for the "wonderful job" it has done for the public, during and after the Sept. 11th attacks, is the largest and most expensive "mass brainwashing machine" ever assembled in human history! It is a machine that so completely brainwashes the nearly 300 millions Americans, that the Nazis' infamous propaganda minister, Josef Goebbels, would have been very envious.
Here are the essential facts about what happened on Sept. 11th: According to Democratic Presidential pre-candidate Lyndon LaRouche, whose assessment is shared by many competent specialists on terrorism and irregular warfare in this country and around the world, what took place was not a terrorist attack, but a strategic, covert special operation, organized to have the "appearance" of a terrorist attack. Mr. LaRouche and others concur that, given both its scope and the extent of the cover-up and misdirection which quickly followed, such an operation could not have been organized by any of the "perpetrators" mentioned above. It had to be organized from within the United States, with the participation and connivance of a rogue network within the Anglo-American intelligence and military establishment.
As with any such covert special operation, there is a psychological warfare component, intended to maximize its effectiveness against a targeted enemy, to confuse that enemy and misdirect him. In the case of the Sept. 11th attacks, THE TARGETED ENEMY WAS (AND STILL IS) THE POPULATION OF THE UNITED STATES AND ITS CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT. The "psywar" component of the operation is being carried out by the American media machine, with the intent purpose of BRAINWASHING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE INTO ACCEPTING THE ONGOING COUP AGAINST OUR CONSTITUTIONAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT.
Few Americans know that 80 Israeli Spies have been detained since 9/11. Many were caught with even more damning evidence of their fifth column activities in the US than the Muslims arrested so far. Many Muslims are still in jail with no evidence, while most of the Israelis caught red-handed have been quietly deported.
While the Muslim terrorist angle for 9/11 was the immediate response of the media, only a few news articles revealed that the first people arrested by the FBI in connection with the Twin Towers destruction were five Israelis in New Jersey. They were seen videotaping the damage from a rooftop while cheering and dancing after the jets made direct hits that morning.
Suspicious neighbors called the police who arrested them and handed them over to the FBI. The FBI questioned them for days and reportedly used "physical pressure" as the Israelis call their torture of Palestinians. Papers in Israel were irate about their treatment but kept it low key, because of the dancing part or their detention.
They were supposedly employees of an Israeli owned "moving company", but were found to be working for Israeli military and intelligence agencies. The moving company was discovered to be one of a group of trucking company false fronts for another Israeli spying operation.
The Israelis, without question, knew of the hijacking plans well before the attack. *Two hours before* the attack, messages were sent to Israeli firms and employees with offices in the WTC, of the impending attack. The FBI admitted it was investigating the messages received and sent through the Israeli firm *Odigo*.
Of course, Ariel Sharon and the Mossad (Israeli spy ring) knew that ONLY ISRAEL WOULD BENEFIT FROM THE WTC ATTACKS, and that this horrible attack against American citizens would set back the Palestinian and whole Arab cause tremendously. (Which of course it has.)
The Israeli death toll in the WTC was impossibly low, unless at least some Israeli nationals were warned. Israel's leading newspaper, The Jerusalem Post, the day after the attacks headlined that 4,000 Israelis were believed to be in the area of the WTC. The involvement of large numbers of Israeli nationals in the banking, brokerage, finance and international trade business at the WTC was legendary. Even the co-owner of the WTC is himself an Israeli citizen! So even if The Jerusalem Post estimated number of Israelis at the WTC was too high, the actual Israeli death toll at the WTC turned out to be **only one**. That's right, only one! An impossibly low number, unless at least some Israelis were warned of the impending attack.
Dozens of Israelis have been detained after 9/11 under suspicious circumstances, including carrying blue prints for nuclear power plants, dumping videotapes of the Sears Tower, and of course with boxcutters. Only Fox news reported on their arrests in a series of news stories about Israeli spying last fall, but then quickly removed the stories from their web site, even though they featured many scoops.
Does that mean that those who produce mass media are involved in the operation? No, it doesn't work that way. As explained and documented in a 1997 special report, the U.S. media are controlled and run as a cartel by the Anglo-American establishment. As such, it routinely serves the interest of that establishment to report what it wants reported and suppress what it doesn't want reported; or "slanting reporting to conceal reality". Thus, the media's performance before, during and after Sept. 11th could be predetermined by those who planned the operation, so as to become a feature of it; it would merely require to insert certain specific "psyops" content into this media brainwashing apparatus for it to be spread far and wide, with the desired effect on you and your friends and your neighbors.
The brainwashing methods are relatively simple and classic. First, use the terror itself to put people into a state of shock, making them more susceptible to suggestion. Then resort to the "Big Lie" technique to repeatedly hammer home your psywar message--those affirmative answers to the questions we first asked. And most importantly, lie, by suppressing all counter-evidence, by refusing to report anything that might point to the assessment shared by Mr. LaRouche and others: "the cover-up". All this has been done, along with an initial softening of the population to the mass delusional suggestion of the "enemy image" and the alleged capabilities and motivations of the so-called terrorists, PRIOR TO THE LAUNCHING OF THE ATTACK ITSELF.
Don't be so hasty about dismissing the possibility of your own brainwashing. The enemy knows your profile extremely well and uses it against you. Doesn't that make you a bit angry - for the right reasons - perhaps for the first time since just after the Sept. 11th incidents?
Our report below is designed to give you a view from the "inside" of this brainwashing process, to see how it has worked on you and your friends and neighbors. And while we can't yet say who is specifically behind what was done to this country - and is still being done - we can show you how they think about brainwashing and use it to deceive you about anything and everything.
Psychological Terror as a Means of Warfare: "Dresden Redux" -
Before discussing the brainwashing operation itself, we wanted to provide a little background on the use of terror against mass civilian populations. Not surprisingly, this was pioneered by the brainwashers of the Anglo-American establishment.
As commentators on the scene at "Ground Zero" of the World Trade Center (WTC) attack on Sept. 11th surveyed the devastation, they reached for metaphors to describe the incredible scene. "It looks like Dresden," said one correspondent, referring to the firebombing of that German city by the Allies in 1944.
Dresden had no military value as a target. For centuries, it had been a center of German cultural heritage - a heritage that had everything to do with positive developments in human civilization and nothing to do with the Nazi disease that had been imposed on Germany by the Anglo-American financial elite (or Illuminati). Dresden was chosen for destruction as an act of TERRORISM; directed, not against the Nazis per se, but the German people.
The firebombing of Dresden, creating a raging inferno of destruction that slaughtered more than 100,000 human beings, was conceived and directed by a group of social psychiatrists at the Strategic Bombing Survey, affiliated with the Special Operations Command of the "Office of Strategic Services" (OSS - which has since evolved into the CIA). This group was effectively overseen by the head of the British Psychological Warfare Directorate, Brig. General John Rawlings Rees, director of the Tavistock Institute in London, England, which, since the 1920s, has served as a "center of psychological warfare operations" of the British Empire.
The team at the Strategic Bombing Survey, which included a host of U.S.- based Tavistock operatives, such as Kurt Lewin, Rensis Likert and Margaret Mead, theorized that the terror inflicted on the German population through the "message of Dresden" would break their will to fight, leaving them fearful, frightened, and disorganized. They projected that it would have a lasting effect on Germany, removing that nation from among the great states of Europe, making it a permanently psychologically scarred entity. The German people, they argued, would be made to realize that "all that is German" could be wiped away - all of its culture and history - in an instant, as it were, by any powers who would oppose an assertive future for Germany.
In his 1941 book, "Time Perspective and Morale," Kurt Lewin described the psychology behind the use of this terror tactic for mass effect:
One of the main techniques for breaking morale through "a strategy of terror" consists in exactly this tactic - "keep the person hazy as to where he stands and just what he may expect next. If in addition, frequent vacillations between severe disciplinary measures and promises of good treatment, together with the spreading of contradictory news, make the cognitive structure of this situation utterly unclear, then the individual may cease to know when a particular plan would lead toward or away from his goal. Under these conditions, even those individuals who have definite goals and are ready to take risks would be paralyzed with severe inner conflicts in regard to what to do next."
As the pilots and their crews came to realize what they had done - the creation of a raging inferno, burning civilian targets and civilians - many returned to their bases horrified. At the instruction of the psyops warriors, the crews had not been fully briefed on the mission. Now, they were greeted by teams of psychologists and others who would profile their responses to the terror they had unleashed; they were told, as the crews who later dropped, unnecessarily, atomic bombs on two Japanese cities, that it would "shorten the war."
As one former intelligence officer remarked decades later, "we killed for pure terror, slaughtered people as A TERRORIST WOULD. And it had no effect on shortening the war. In fact, it seemed to help rally the German people to the Hitler government. The fools who designed this mission probably extended the war."
The attacks on the U.S. Sept. 11th (in particular the WTC attack) was designed for a similar "PSYWAR" brainwashing effect.
Our information IS controlled -
The cell phone calls from the aircraft could not have happened. I am a National Security Agency trained Electronic Warfare specialist, and am qualified to say this. My official title: MOS33Q10, Electronic Warfare Intercept Strategic Signal Processing/Storage Systems Specialist, a highly skilled MOS which requires advanced knowledge of many communications methods and circuits to the most minute level. I am officially qualified to place severe doubt that ordinary cell phone calls were ever made from the aircraft.
It was impossible for that to have happened, especially in a rural area for a number of reasons.
When you make a cell phone call, the first thing that happens is that your cell phone needs to contact a transponder. Your cell phone has a maximum transmit power of five watts. Three watts is actually the norm. If an aircraft is going five hundred miles an hour, your cell phone will not be able to:
1. Contact a tower.
2. Tell the tower who you are, and who your provider is.
3. Tell the tower what mode it wants to communicate with.
4. Establish that it is in a roaming area before it passes out of a five watt range.
This procedure, called an "electronic handshake", takes approximately 45 seconds for a cell phone to complete upon initial power up in a roaming area, because neither the cell phone nor cell transponder knows where that phone is and what mode it uses when it is turned on. At 500 miles an hour, the aircraft will travel three times the range of a cell phone's five watt transmitter before this handshaking can occur. Though it is sometimes possible to connect during takeoff and landing, under the situation that was claimed, the cell phone calls were impossible. The calls from the airplane were faked, no if's, ands, or buts.
I hope I made sense, if you have questions I will respond if possible. If I do not respond, please research this out yourself, search the Boeing site, search the DARPA site, search where you have not searched before. Some of the information is classified and leaked by individuals and it is also being scoured from the net. I have all of the original documents on my computer to safeguard against this.
Do not ignore this fact. Only NORAD has the flight codes for those aircraft. We did 9/11 to ourselves.
Hitler had the Reichstag, we have 9/11. If 9/11 proves to not be enough to make the US citizenry set aside its rights for safety, the people who did 9/11 most certainly have access to nuclear material. 9/11 must be exposed for what it was before that material is used."
According to "defense experts," the Sept. 11th strike "was clearly an example of what military strategists call "psyops"; that is, a brand of warfare, whose aim is not to disable military targets, but to sap the overall strength and will of a nation and its people."
The article goes on to quote from a 1999 paper by military strategist and analyst Joseph Cyrulik of the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) at Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., "Asymmetric Warfare and the Threat to the American Homeland": "By killing and wounding people, damaging and destroying their homes and communities, disrupting their jobs and economic livelihoods, and undermining their confidence and sense of security, an enemy can inflict pain to the point that people demand a change in their government's policies."
"Used at the right time and place ... an attack could destroy the people's faith in their government, their military, and themselves. It could become a decisive attack against the political will of an entire populace."
Cyrulik is part of a network of "thinkers" who seek to change all military doctrine to meet alleged 21st Century threats; in so doing, this network wants to activate psyops, including "covert warfare" such as asassinations. While we can't say that such people are directly responsible for what occurred on Sept. 11th, their assumptions about strategy, tactics, and the elevated value of psychological warfare, as well as the mis-direction involved in their ascribing powers to "terrorist organizations" or rogue states", fit nicely into their overall operation.
There are new methods (unavailable at the time of the Dresden attack) for maximizing the psychological effects of a "TERROR CAMPAIGN" which parallel standard brainwashing techniques. One involves the repetition of terrifying images, the kind that would make a person recoil and then compelling that person to continue viewing them. Such terrifying images weaken the ability of the mind to reason, making it more susceptible to suggestion and manipulation.
In the hours following the attack on the World Trade Center, every television media outlet in the United States broadcast, again and again, the images of the airplanes smashing into the Twin Towers from all conceivable angles and then the shots of the two towers collapsing. It was easily the most terrifying real-life images that most Americans had ever seen.
A population induced into a state of terror and shock was then bombarded with a SUGGESTION: images started to appear, the mugshot-like photos of the alleged perpetrators, and the image of the "evil mastermind" behind the deed, Osama bin Laden.
And you still believe that you weren't brainwashed?
The Movies In Our Heads -
"God, this is just like a movie," exclaimed CBS anchor Dan Rather, as the first of the World Trade Center towers collapsed. "Only, it's the real thing." Did you have the sense, as you were witnessing the horror of the WTC attack, that you too, had seen this before? You probably had - and that is part of the brainwashing operation.
In the last five years, there have been at least a half-dozen movies, whose plots have centered on a terrorist attack on the United States. Hollywood statisticians have estimated that these have been viewed in movie theaters and through the sale of home videos, by more than 100 million people! And many of these movies have recently portrayed Arabs or Islamic fundamentalists as being directly behind the terrorist assaults.
Each of these films has some "expert" advisor, usually a "former counter- terrorism expert" and in some cases, someone who has worked in the military. While it would be a leap to say that the movie-production companies or the "experts" are necessarily witting accomplices in the current plot, the movies, with their "steered" scripts, helped people believe that "Arab" terrorists might be capable of doing what was done on Sept. 11th.
Long before there was television, images were placed for "playback in America's memory banks" - first by the print media, and then, starting early in the 20th Century with the first of the real mass media, the movies. Hollywood is a component of the Anglo-American media cartel, a point made more obvious by recent creation of "entertainment conglomerates" through mergers and acquisitions. Thus, a mere handful of companies, with interlocking boards, comprised of people within the Anglo-American establishment, control all of what we see in the multiplexes, on television, in the print media, and more recently, what we view on the Internet as well. A powerful example of this cartel is the recent merger of AOL and Time/Warner.
As movies were becoming a truly mass-media phenomenon, the Anglo-American commentator Walter Lippmann described their power, along with the power of the media in general, in shaping "public opinion", or what you and your neighbors think. In his 1921 handbook on the mass manipulation of the public mind, "Public Opinion", Lippmann, who had been trained by Rees, among others, at the British propaganda directorate during World War I, writes in his introductory chapter, "The World Outside and the Pictures in Our Heads":
"Public opinion deals with indirect, unseen, and puzzling facts, and there is nothing obvious about them ... the pictures inside the heads of these human beings, the pictures of themselves, of others, of their needs, purposes and relationships, are their opinions. Those pictures acted on by groups of people or by individuals acting in the name of groups, are Public Opinion with capital letters ... The picture inside (the head) so often misleads men in their dealings with the world outside."
Somewhere in your memory banks were planted the "pictures in your head" of the WTC attack. New Yorker film critic Anthony Lane writes in the magazine's Sept. 24th issue, "How often have we listened to these words since Sept. 11th?" The statement of fact: "The worst terrorist bombing since Oklahoma City." The promise: "Make no mistake about it - we will hunt down the enemy, we will find the enemy and we will kill the enemy." The caution: "You can't fight a war against an enemy you can't see." And the ominous look ahead: "This is a time of war; the fact that it is inside our borders means that it is a new kind of war." We have learned such sentiments like a script; that we have heard it again and again (especially since Sept. 11th) has not diminished the sternness with which we have given our assent.
Just one problem: it IS a script!! All of the lines quoted above came from a movie called "The Siege," a 1998 thriller directed by Edward Zwick.
The plot of that movie involves a network of "Arab" terrorist cells, which commit acts of increasingly violent intensity against civilian targets in New York City. Video clips of President Clinton commenting on the attacks launched by his administration against the networks of Osama bin Laden are spliced into the movie footage. As the terrorists wreak more havoc and kill more people, New York City is placed under martial law; anyone who looks "Arab" is rounded up and placed in internment camps, even as the violence continues.
In the end, the movie becomes a sermon on how to moderate attacks on the Constitution and on ethnic profiling of Americans, while the nation goes on to fight the foreign, "Arab-terrorist" enemy.
When "The Siege" opened in November 1998, it was greeted with protests from the Arab-American Anti-Discrimination Committee, who charged that it "portrays Arabs and Muslims as a homogeneous, threatening mass," and labelled the film, produced by Rupert Murdoch's 20th Century Fox, "dangerous and incendiary."
Despite such protests and relatively poor reviews, the movie sold several million dollars worth of tickets and has done well in its video release. In remarking about how successful the movie-brainwashing effort has been, Lane noted, in the "New Yorker," that the majority of Americans reacted to those events with the same kind of unreasoned emotion that they expressed at the multiplexes or in their own home theaters:
"And the exclamations from below, from the watchers of the skies caught on video, as they see the aircraft slice into the side of the tower: where have you heard those expressions most recently? - the wows, the woohs, the "holy shits" - if not in the movie theaters, and even on your own blaspheming tongue?" "Hollywood, through films like "The Siege" and "Die Hard," writes Lane, has provided a "sensory education ... fed to a hungry public."
In the days following the attack, President Bush's approval rating shot up to above 90% and stayed there, especially after his nationally televised address of Sept. 13th. Following the speech, a CNN commentator observed that the President's approval was so high because he was behaving the way Americans expected him to: "like the President in "Independence Day" (a blockbuster movie about an attack on Washington and the U.S. by aliens) or the presidential character played by Martin Sheen in the "West Wing" (a popular TV show)."
And you still think that you haven't been brainwashed?
"Morphing" The Enemy Image -
Take a close look at the image of Osama bin Laden, as it appears on the television screens in this time of a new "war." In psyops terms, bin Laden has become the image of the enemy - the picture that a targetted population keeps in mind as the person, or, specifically, the "type" of person it is fighting. There is the swarthy complexion, the beard, the burnoose, the weapon in hand - it is all there, all as expected, an ideal subject for the projected rage and hatred of an injured nation. No matter that bin Laden is not really the evil mastermind.
In the days and weeks leading up to the attack, media-watch organizations reported that the major U.S. television news outlets, including the cable networks CNN and Fox News, devoted an inordinate amount of time to what consists of their "international" coverage, to bin Laden, describing him as a "terrorist mastermind" or a "terrorist controller," almost always accompanied by a photo or video clip to drive their point home.
But his creation by the media as a "terrorist mastermind" doesn't really begin there. To understand what happened, one needs to look at a nearly 30-year span of news reporting that has led us to this point, where some character, a former and current asset of U.S.-British-Israeli intelligence networks, operating from "caves" and other bases in one of the most remote and isolated areas of the world, has become U.S. "Public Enemy Number One?!"
Look at the bin Laden enemy image as a morphing process that begins with the television image of the Black September terrorists of the 1972 Olympics. Then, continue to the 1973 images of Palestinian leader Yassar Arafat; later, there are the images of Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini and the fanatic mullahs.
Think of someone in Hollywood's central casting trying to find a person to portray the terrorist archetype, given these past figures and images: An oil- rich, almost mystical clerical type (although he holds no religious position) who looks like a morph of "enemies" Arafat and Khomeini, gets the part."
The population has also been pre-conditioned to accept the "story line" that terrorists who would do such things as took place on Sept. 11th "MUST BE ARAB AND/OR MUSLIM FANATICS," as thousands of televised hours of misreporting have repeated. Arab organizations in this country report polling results showing that, by a large margin, Americans believe, even without supporting evidence, that any act of terrorism has "Arab" origins or "Arab" perpetrators.
As one intelligence source said this week, within minutes of the World Trade Center attack, Americans had decided that this was done by "Arab terrorists" connected to "terrorist mastermind bin Laden." "They didn't need to be told to think this," said the source. "They had already been conditioned to believe it." Are such people not "brainwashed?"
We are told that our press is "free", but isn't that a lie? How "free" can it be, if the most important event of our time is lied about, at almost every turn and grossly misreported?; if the truth is nowhere to be found among the smorgasbord of news outlets that comprise our glorious, "free" press?
In Nazi Germany, propaganda minister Josef Goebbels boasted that the press was "free" to report whatever it wanted. But, the press was "coordinated" through the operation of a "press trust," that encompassed all media. The Nazis planted stories in the press to suit their ends and the trust dutifully reported them, with various spins that might give the appearance that not all media were receiving information from the same spigot.
While most Americans might find it very hard to believe, THERE IS NO PRACTICAL DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PROPAGANDA OPERATION OF THE NAZI PRESS TRUST AND THE ANGLO-AMERICAN MEDIA ENTERTAINMENT CARTEL. It is not hard to slant the coverage of any event to suit almost any purpose - as long as that purpose fits the needs of the elites, who ultimately "control" the media. All it takes is the planting of a few key items of content, which are then flushed down through the media sewer pipes. Before you know it, the poor citizen is deluged. In a certain sense, the Nazi operation was less insidious, because it was more overt; only fools would fail to realize that they were being fed the "line" by Goebbels and his crew. Here, the appearance of choice, the appearance of a flood of information, confuses the average citizen into believing that HE MUST BE GETTING THE TRUTH FROM SOMEWHERE.
But, even a cursory content analysis of all or most of our news sources, especially the major television providers, shows that the general content line from all sources is basically the same. This has been the case, for example, in coverage of Lyndon LaRouche and his policies; in the major media, the coverage of LaRouche has followed the line dictated by the late Lazard Freres - linked Katharine Graham of the "Washington Post", to never cover LaRouche, unless it was to slander him. Similarly, the decision to black out the present global depression and financial collapse. While there may be no formal meetings among the controllers of the media cartel where such policy is laid out, a policy consensus, nonetheless, ruthlessly enforces the content of the "news."
In periods of crisis, like the current one, however, some of the controls become more visible; much less is left to chance.
It has been reported by some sources, that within a few hours of the Sept. 11th attacks, executive orders were issued which put the U.S. media under effective "wartime censorship". That is not to say that government auditors of news reporting actually issued orders censoring reports; it is to say that they moved quickly to block any reporting that might have veered away from the "official line."
There was also coordination on the extent of coverage as well. It was reported that all broadcast media were given the "recommendation" to cease normal program broadcasts in favor of 24-hour coverage of the "Terrorist Attack On The United States" and "America at War," as the ID logos appeared on all of the major networks. It was also reliably reported that the White House and national security operatives participated in the decision to cancel all major sporting events.
What this translates into, we have been told, is that a muzzle has been placed on government sources, and that all information coming out about the attacks and the investigation is under top-down control. This is understood by those who control the news reporting of the major media outlets, who have thus submitted to a "voluntary" censorship.
And you, of course, have still somehow managed to understand the "truth" in this complicated brainwashing environment? "Give me a break!!"
Beating the drums for war, there was a brief interval that morning of Sept. 11th, as the great brainwashing machine allowed for the visual impact of the terrorizing message to sink in, before the signal was given for the talking heads to "pronounce the name" of the enemy.
If it appeared to some that no matter which channel - broadcast or cable - you tuned in to during those first hours, you saw the same dozen or so "spin doctors," you weren't mistaken: This has been confirmed by various media-watch outfits. For example, one media-watch organization tallied more than a dozen appearances by former CIA Director James Woolsey in the first few days after the attack, each repeating the message about the need to wage war against Iran, Iraq and anyone else who allegedly sponsored the likes of bin Laden. An only slightly less strident Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) appeared numerous times; we lost count on Henry Kissinger.
As the media-watch group, Fairness and Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) stated, following Sept. 11th, any hope that the media would present an unbiased account of what happened, that it might resist the drive for an ill-defined war, went out the window. Instead, FAIR documented how the print and broadcast media issued emotional tirades for war, echoing what they believed to be the sentiment of the American people; in so doing, there were no contrary views presented, and in effect, Americans still have no clear idea about what happened, or exactly what the Bush Administration is proposing to do to protect them from future terrorist threats.
Look at the following examples, which could be amplified by many more:
* Kissinger-clone Larry Eagleburger, appearing on CNN, on the day of the attack: "There is only one way to deal with people like this, and that is you have to kill some of them, even if they are not directly involved in this thing."
* The "New York Post", the next day: "The response to this unimaginable 21st- Century Pearl Harbor should be as simple as it is swift - kill the bastards. A gunshot between the eyes, blow them to smithereens, poison them if you have to. As for the cities or countries of these host worms, bomb them into basketball courts."
* Sept. 14th op-ed in the "Washington Times" by Defense Intelligence Agency officer Thomas Woodrow: "At a bare minimum, tactical nuclear capabilities should be used against the bin Laden camps in the desert of Afghanistan. To do less would be rightly seen by the poisoned minds that orchestrated these attacks as cowardice on the part of the United States and the current administration."
FAIR commentator and media watcher Norman Solomon commented that many of the same people who were now calling for a "war against terrorism" and anyone who might support it (including many of the analysts who were appearing as talking heads and op-ed columnists) were themselves involved in assisting terrorists, including Osama bin Laden, when such efforts were official, if then-secret U.S. policy. "How can a long-time associate of terrorists now be credibly denouncing terrorism?", he asks. "It's easy. All that is required is for media coverage to remain in a kind of history-free zone that has no use for facets of reality that are not presently convenient to acknowledge."
One of those "inconvenient facts" was the well-documented involvement of U.S. "special ops" people, and the Zbigniew Brzezinski crowd; then, later, Ollie North and the Bush people, with bin Laden, dating back to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, which amounted to the biggest "state sponsorship" of terrorism, or at least sponsorship by a then-dominant faction of our government and intelligence community. FAIR and other media-watch groups report that almost no one mentioned these "inconvenient" matters, amidst the vast flow of war propaganda; and if they did, it was only to lie that it was a policy that had long since been abandoned.
Similarly, much attention was given to reports about FBI and other agencies work in putting together the "conspiracy" behind the attack. To this date, no one in the major media outlets of the United States has mentioned that there is even a possibility of involvement of U.S. elements. Instead, the reporting has focused on a combination of "spade work" on clues and leads, as well as, alleged connections to the bin Laden networks. FAIR remarked on such coverage, saying that the shots of bin Laden and his camps gave the impression that there had been more than circumstantial evidence linking them to attacks. The only proof offered was from "intelligence leaks" coming from the wartime propaganda apparatus created by the Executive Order or from assertions made by the talking heads and other "experts."
The only characteristic, universal to all the coverage, is the cover-up of any possible trail leading to a domestic source for the control of the terrorism.
Is all reporting being so "coordinated and steered?" It is clear that some of the wackos, like Fox News's Bill O'Reilly, a particularly vile character, are simply being given free rein to vent their lunacy.
On Sept. 17th, O'Reilly demanded that, if the Taliban do not turn over bin Laden, "the U.S. should bomb the Afghani infrastructure to rubble - the airport, power plants, their water facilities, and the roads."
"This is a very primitive country. And taking out their ability to exist day to day will not be hard. Remember, the people of any country are responsible for the government that they have. The Germans were responsible for Hitler. The Afghans are responsible for the Taliban. We should not target civilians. But if they don't rise up against their government, they starve, period."
He went to advocate, in that broadcast and others, to "make the Iraqi population suffer another round of intense pain" and to blockade Libya from all food supplies: "Let them eat sand."
As is typical with a "grey psyops" propaganda campaign, the most extreme ravings are played off against those only slightly less lunatic, to make the latter appear sane by comparison. Thus, an O'Reilly makes a Woolsey look like a sober analyst, as he calls for a war to take out governments that support terrorism, and for "careful" and "calculated" escalating response against bin Laden.
To hold people's attention, to keep them on "message," it were necessary to keep them in a highly emotional state. To do this, there was a steady stream of "human interest" stories about the grief of affected victims, about the courage of rescue workers and those who perished, along with shots of grieving citizens. While the courage and grief are real, the constant bombardment of these images is BRAINWASHING CONDITIONING. Without them, you would have, after a few days, turned off CNN and the "news" coverage.
Do you still insist that neither you, nor your friends or neighbors, have been taken in by any of this?
"Crash? What Crash?" Lost amidst the war hysteria, or more precisely, "spun" inside of it, is the coverup of what would otherwise be the biggest story of the day: the full-scale crash and blowout of the financial markets! The markets, at last look, had plunged nearly 20% since Wall Street reopened on Sept. 17th. A fall that precipitous is normally called a "crash," engendering widespread panic, not only among traders and brokers, but among the general population. But in the weeks (and now, months!) after the crash, "not one" commentator on a major network has used the term "crash"! Moreover, we are told, it is our patriotic duty to have faith in the eventual recovery of the markets and the economy. "We can't let the terrorists defeat us and bring our economy down," said financial commentator Louis Ruckeyser on his televised show, "Wall Street Week."
As Lyndon LaRouche has stated, "the crash would have occurred anyway," given the bankrupt state of world financial systems, even without the Sept. 11th events. However, now the financial analysts who appear on the television news and in the print media are universally blaming most, if not all, of what happened on "Osama bin Laden." This was to be expected, they claim, given what happened on Sept. 11th, in what is the biggest "Big Lie" of them all!!
As one trader reported, "My God! The bottom has fallen out and nobody calls it a crash. It's like it's your patriotic duty not to mention the word. Hell, the Dow's lost more than 1,500 points - that's a CRASH! But, if I am overheard saying this, people look at me: "Where's your American flag? Remember who you are and what's going on. Do you want to help Osama bin Laden in his plot to destroy our economy?" Unbelievable!!"
But, as like many other media-brainwashed Americans, this trader was, in his words, "going with the program." It's not a crash, it's a "terrorist event."
A Clockwork Future? Several nights after the Sept. 11th attacks, CNN flashed images on the screen of National Guard personnel patroling the streets of Washington and heavily armed special police in New York City, inspecting cars at a tunnel entrance. Then, images were flashed of Israeli military personnel on the streets of Jerusalem, inspecting cars. The voiceover, by CNN news-witch Greta van Susteren, a regular featured personality of that media sewer, along with Mossad-asset Wolf Blitzer, spoke of America, in response to the "terrorist threat," becoming an increasingly "policed society," where civil liberties had to be sacrificed for the protection of its citizens. We have seen this before, she said, not just in Jerusalem, but in Belfast, Northern Ireland, as a response to "political terrorism" of the IRA and Protestant militia. After a while, people get used to it, she said. "Life goes on." Interviews were presented with Israelis who seemed to concur with the sentiment that, under conditions of "internal war with terrorists," one needs to adjust to sacrifices in civil liberties. "Americans will get used to it, just like we did," the Israeli said.
Thus, the media prepares, or more precisely - "conditions" - the country to accept a form of police state, justified by a threat that has not really been dealt with and whose true source has been covered up. Not surprisingly, when Attorney General John Ashcroft proposed legislation for a sweeping abridgement of civil liberties, it was given relatively short shrift by the same media. FAIR reports that two of the three network news broadcasts never reported it at all; while it was hardly mentioned on CNN or Fox News. The print media, while reporting it, maintained the theme of the "necessary sacrifice" of civil liberties for personal safety and security.
Back in the mid-1970s, Eric Trist and Fred Emery, two leading Tavistock Institute brainwashers and "experts" on the effects of mass media, forecast that, by the end of the century, the United States was likely to become just such a fascist police state.
The two developed a theory of "social turbulence," by which a society is delivered a series of "shocks" - administered as shared, mass phenomena - energy shortages, economic and financial collapse, and TERRORIST attacks. If the "shocks" were to come close upon each other, and if they were delivered with increasing intensity, then it was possible to drive the entire society into a state of mass psychosis, Trist and Emery said. They also stated that individuals would become "disassociated", as they tried to flee from the terror of the shocking, emerging reality; people would withdraw into a state of denial, retreating into popular entertainments and diversions, while being prone to outbursts of rage.
That rage could easily be steered, said the two brainwashers, by those who had access and control over the means of mass communication, most notably television.
It was the view of Trist and Emery, in two works widely circulated among the networks of brainwashers and social psychiatrists associated with Tavistock and among the psychological-warfare operatives of the U.S. and Britain, that the process of watching television was in and of itself a brainwashing mechanism. They cited their own studies, that regardless of content, habitual television viewing shuts down the cognitive powers of the mind and has a "narcotic-like effect" on the central nervous system, making the habitual viewer an easy subject for suggestion and manipulation; in addition, they found that such effectively brainwashed "zombies" would hysterically deny that there was anything wrong with them, or, even, that such manipulation of what they "thought" were possible.
In a chilling metaphor, Trist and Emery proposed that the terrorized, violent society of the Anthony Burgess book, "A Clockwork Orange," made into a movie by Stanley Kubrick, was the logical societal outcome for an America that would, by the end of the century, have been subjected to more than 50 years of mass brainwashing by the "boob tube." Burgess's world is one of perpetual violence and terrorism, as a daily part of life; it is accepted that, if you go out at a certain time, or walk in a certain neighborhood, you will be attacked and/or killed. There is no purpose to the violence - it is random and meaningless, and therefore all the more terrifying. The wealthy are protected; everyone else is told to go about their business with knowledge of the risk.
With terrorist youth gangs roaming the streets, people stay at home, watching televised entertainment, or go only to certain areas which are heavily protected by police and military. The most sickening thing about Burgess's image is the sense of hopelessness, of inevitability, that nothing can be done about it - it is just "the way it is," as Dan Rather's predecessor as CBS News anchor, Walter Cronkite, used to remind us each night, as he closed his broadcast.
While the Trist-Emery thesis is not exactly required reading in the caves of Afghanistan, it is quite familiar to the psy-warriors and brainwashers who have launched a war on the American population. There is a particular kind of oligarchical evil that would think like this, that would see a Clockwork Orange society as a necessary outcome, to protect their continued privilege and power. Are we Americans already so brainwashed that we would allow this to happen? The next weeks and months will determine whether we truly do have the moral fitness to survive.
"The end of the world. Details at 11. Now back to your regular programming."
The first step in deprogramming yourself from mass-media brainwashing, to freeing yourself and your neighbors from its evil clutches, is to recognize that you and they are, indeed, brainwashed. It gets a lot easier, and things begin to get much clearer from there on.
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten