Land of the free? Brainwashing in the United States

[Yomar]

It could also be argued that people are more cynical towards the information they receive than ever before, regardless of the source, and hence an unfamiliar source is to be met with an especially high level of cynicism. The more studies into propaganda that are done, the less the effect of propaganda has and while it may have numerous forms, propoganda is limited by its own need to convey a lie and hence imperfect in its deceit. The more times a person is deceived, the less likely they are to be deceived again.

The 100s of Israeli Spies story had a couple of problems with it. One it broke just before 9/11 (I believe thats right, if not you can tell me)...not much else was going to make the headlines once 9/11 happened. But more importantly, I found any connection between that story and 9/11 to be tenuous at best and very speculative, and when I read other people speculating to me, I get suspicious as to why. I believe I remember reading quotes from intelligence sources laughing at the notion that the Israelis were actively involved in 9/11. Now I did note that you didn't claim as much in your initial post, but the title of your thread certainly carried some unspoken undertones that could be construed as misleading, since you put both "100 Israeli Spies" and "9/11" in the same subject heading. The evidence was mostly circumstantial, and when you are talking about reporting that an ally has been caught spying, you need to be a little more certain than that, particularly if you are the NY Times. Lobbying and special interests come into play in NY too and the media is not squeaky clean, but that goes to why such cynicism exists towards all information outlets.

Also Israel spying on us is not a new development, it has been widely reported by all the major news outlets in the past. I know better than to trust Israel or any of our allies, and so does our government. This isn't friendship, its diplomacy, and there is only one rule, national interest.

[luckydevil]

This might be a mistake, but what the hell. Seems like you’re a big fan of conspiracies, so this site is perfect for you.

ASF have you tried this site. http://www.skolnicksreport.com/

This might put you over the edge for good.

[Art]

ASF,

You've posted very few facts. You've posted articles that have been written. Very little of which contains anything of factual value. There is speculation. There is unattributed quoting. There is little by way of fact. What little we know of that is factual, you've found a way to say is not true, like, for example, the Bin Laden tape that gives strong indication that his group was the one responsible.

Hell, man, you had one whole thread in defense of a felon, using all of the felon's words as proof to your own brand of insanity. I'm not sure what you find explosive about nation states spying on other nation states. I admit, I've read Christopher Ketchum's stuff in Maxim and Penthouse and thought he was a rather amusing writer. I don't have a problem that he sold a piece like that to Salon.

What I don't get though is how come you think it's as compelling as you do. You see, it's not that I simply distrust normal media, but I really distrust media that writes a story that has what appears to be not a SINGLE directly attributed quote. The closest he comes to actual attribution is copying what television reporters said someone told them during their on air reports.

When you post nonsense like this and wonder, in your wide-ranging, manic fashion, why others aren't jolted by it, you must understand, to the rest of us, you are beginning to read like a journal from the killer in Seven.

Now, I'm sure what you read when you read about "Stability" was a monstrous Mr. X as shown in the JFK movie by Oliver Stone. But, I suspect, as with the Stone portrayal, the character is actually fiction, and if not fiction, probably someone playing a wonderful joke. I say this because what strikes me as odd is that these Israeli agents you keep referring to were nervous, unprepped and obvious. That's how devious the Jews are now? They send nervous kids who can be SEEN for lying into the middle of U.S. intelligence. I know the D.E.A. is an odd target too, and what struck me when reading this cr@p was that the "students" were probably selling paintings on a hemp canvas so they could tell their friends that the D.E.A. has hemp in their offices. Hell, I think he even used a line in this that Sutherland used in JFK, the, "In this particular situation, right is wrong, left is right, up is down, day is night."

But, I digress.

What struck me as odd about this article is that once you got by the song and dance and you actually got into "Stability's" words, you found that the most likely scenario here was a drug dealer thing. Afterall, it was the DEA.

In any case, just months after 9/11 when EVERY aspect of the lead up to 9/11 was being critically examined, a great many stories were written about a great many things. It's not that no one else sees what you see ASF. It's that no one else could, because you are fictionalizing everything. You are creating explosions where there are no explosives. And you are frustrated that all others don't see it.

How come only you, and Chomsky and LaRouche and, oh, hell, do I even have to finish this sentence?

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

If these issues weren't so serious, this discussion would be kind of funny. I propose that certain subjects can't be discussed in the media, and that we're brainwashed to believe we have a free and inquiring mass media with input from dissenting voices. The result, more or less, is the insinuation that I'm nuts and should get the hell out of the USA and take Sean Penn with me.

That's funny.

Not very funny, but still funny.

Here's another "made up" ASF story. Dan Rather, the most senior anchor/reporter in American network news, crawled off to England last year to report on the BBC what he couldn't report on American television. Namely, that American reporters -- including Rather -- are afraid to ask hard questions, for fear of being executed, South Africa-style, with flaming tires around the neck.

Obviously this is a metaphor for having one's career terminated, but the message of media suppression and control is crystal clear.

I'm not a huge Dan Rather fan (and that's an understatement), but it's a fact that this guy is essentially the latter-day Walter Cronkite in terms of seniority. If he's afraid, what does that say about the rest of the media? And why is it that he had to go to England to speak his mind?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2002/05_may/16/dan_rather.shtml

Press Release

16.05.02

BBC NEWS

Veteran CBS News Anchor Dan Rather speaks out on BBC Newsnight tonight

The veteran CBS News anchor and reporter Dan Rather has for the first time attacked the climate of patriotism in the United States, saying it's stopping journalists asking tough questions. In an exclusive interview with BBC TWO's Newsnight tonight (Thursday 16 May), he admits he has held back from taking the Bush administration to task over the so-called war on terror.

Rather says: "It is an obscene comparison - you know I am not sure I like it - but you know there was a time in South Africa that people would put flaming tyres around people's necks if they dissented. And in some ways the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tyre of lack of patriotism put around your neck. Now it is that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions, and to continue to bore in on the tough questions so often. And again, I am humbled to say, I do not except myself from this criticism."

Rather admits self-censorship: "What we are talking about here - whether one wants to recognise it or not, or call it by its proper name or not - is a form of self-censorship. It starts with a feeling of patriotism within oneself. It carries through with a certain knowledge that the country as a whole - and for all the right reasons - felt and continues to feel this surge of patriotism within themselves. And one finds oneself saying: 'I know the right question, but you know what? This is not exactly the right time to ask it'."

He tells Newsnight: "I worry that patriotism run amok will trample the very values that the country seeks to defend... In a constitutional republic, based on the principles of democracy such as ours, you simply cannot sustain warfare without the people at large understanding why we fight, how we fight, and have a sense of accountability to the very top."

He declares himself a patriot, but for him the essence of being American is being able to bring the government to account: "It's unpatriotic not to stand up, look them in the eye, and ask the questions they don't want to hear - they being those who have the responsibility, the ultimate responsibility in a society such as ours, of sending our sons and daughters, our husbands, wives, our blood, to face death, to take death. Now, in my position my view is not to ask the tough questions in this kind of environment is the height of lack of patriotism."

Rather is also stinging about the lack of access and information the Bush administration is giving news journalists over the war: "There has never been an American war, small or large, in which access has been so limited as this one.

"Limiting access, limiting information to cover the backsides of those who are in charge of the war, is extremely dangerous and cannot and should not be accepted. And I am sorry to say that up to and including the moment of this interview, that overwhelmingly it has been accepted by the American people. And the current administration revels in that, they relish that, and they take refuge in that.

"What's being done practically in real terms is in direct variance with the Pentagon's stated policy. The Pentagon stated policy is maximum access and maximum information consistent with national security."

Rather is dismissive about the new trend in American television - "militainment" - mass market reality shows about life in the military. The Pentagon has given unprecedented access to RJ Cutler to make Military Diaries for VH1, which airs later this month. It features service men and women talking personally about the music they listen to away from home, and includes exclusive footage of Operation Anaconda.

Rather says: "The belief runs so strong in both the political and military leadership of the current war effort that those who control the images will control public opinion. They realise what an entertainment-oriented society ours has become. Therefore one way of looking at it is quite natural, they would say to themselves: 'Hey, we've had the Hollywoodisation of the news, we have had the Hollywoodisation of almost everything else in society, why not the Hollywoodisation of the war?'

"And I want to say quietly but as forcefully as I can that I hope this doesn't go any further, it has gone too far already. I am appalled by it, I do think it is an outrage, this is a personal opinion."

[Yomar]

Art,

I assume you meant to direct the entire post to ASF, but if you did mean to direct some of it to me, I don't really know what you are talking about.

[Yomar]

Rather says: "It is an obscene comparison - you know I am not sure I like it - but you know there was a time in South Africa that people would put flaming tyres around people's necks if they dissented. And in some ways the fear is that you will be necklaced here, you will have a flaming tyre of lack of patriotism put around your neck. Now it is that fear that keeps journalists from asking the toughest of the tough questions, and to continue to bore in on the tough questions so often. And again, I am humbled to say, I do not except myself from this criticism."

This is useless. Either you ask the tough questions and adhere to the concept of journalistic intergrity or you don't and succumb to intimidation, but saying something like this is useless. I really think this statement exhibits a lack of respect for the intellect of the American people.

While I think the Dickie Chicks situation is ridiculous and people should leave those girls alone, there is a difference between making political statements and asking tough questions. If Rather is biting his tongue out of fear of being smeared, he is not doing his job.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Yomar

Israel spying on us is not a new development, it has been widely reported by all the major news outlets in the past.

Yomar, you're overstating how "widely reported" Israeli spying has been. Maybe Jonathan Pollard, and that's about it.

OK, America. Raise your hand if you know that Israel runs the U.S. phone billing system (through Amdocs) and automated wiretapping system (through Comverse), and as a result can tap essentially any call in America at will, and know instantly through records who you are calling.

And raise your hand if you know that there's an Israeli organized crime ring with operations in New York, Miami, Las Vegas, Canada, Israel and Egypt -- spanning "cocaine and ecstasy trafficking, and sophisticated white-collar credit card and computer fraud".

I must be living under a rock, because apparently *everyone* knows all this and is cool with it.

See, I thought that this was reported only once in the major media -- in a four-part FoxNews report that has since been suppressed on the FoxNews web site.

Obviously I'm mistaken -- all this is no big deal, known to everyone.

[Yomar]

I don't know what to tell you, I have heard about it and I'm not overly concerned. I have a great deal of faith in the men and women who work in our government. I've said before, I don't trust politicians, but I do trust the career bureaucrats and if we have heard about I know the people who need to know about it do and the steps necessary to protect our national interests have been taken.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Yomar

I don't know what to tell you, I have heard about it and I'm not overly concerned. I have a great deal of faith in the men and women who work in our government. I've said before, I don't trust politicians, but I do trust the career bureaucrats and if we have heard about I know the people who need to know about it do and the steps necessary to protect our national interests have been taken.

Yomar, I believe you are sincere. But you can't be thinking through the calculus of blackmail when married to sufficiently powerful technology.

As I've posted here before, I believe that essentially everyone has something to hide -- and can therefore be blackmailed if the secret or secrets are discovered.

Universal wiretapping is the technology of complete control of any individual -- or country -- at will. It's easy and cheap to flip people when they know that to resist means all the bad stuff comes out -- the affairs, the gay prostitutes, the shady business deals, the tax evasion, etc.

It's the technology of unlimited power. And you want us to believe that it's not being used?

[Yomar]

I want you to believe that if there is a real threat of a foriegn power using private industry to acquire sensitive information and use that information to blackmail and influence American policy, the threat would be immediately dealt with as soon as it was known, and if we were talking about it on Extremeskins.com, I'm fairly sure the threat had already been assessed and addressed.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Yomar

I want you to believe that if there is a real threat of a foriegn power using private industry to acquire sensitive information and use that information to blackmail and influence American policy, the threat would be immediately dealt with as soon as it was known, and if we were talking about it on Extremeskins.com, I'm fairly sure the threat had already been assessed and addressed.

I agree the threat has been assessed. Here's what they're doing about it:

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&postid=271024

investigators within the DEA, INS and FBI have all told Fox News that to pursue or even suggest Israeli spying through Comverse is considered career suicide.

Again, follow the calculus of blackmail. Once people on the top have been flipped, there's nothing people further down can do about it.

And, keeping with the narrative of this thread, people in the know can't even go to the mass media to blow the whistle. What's more, if they go to "fringe media" on the Web, no one believes them, because the mass media hasn't reported the story. If somebody like me reports it, I'm run out of the country even by a group of supposedly kindred peers.

It's air tight.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Here's a sample of some declassified information about Israel's espionage. According to the Fox News report briefly on the Fox web site, "Country A" in that analysis was Israel. (Israel was originally identified as Country A by the Washington Times.)

The analysis was 1996 testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. Here's are some "examples" of espionage by Country A:

The following are intelligence agency examples of Country A information collection efforts:

An espionage operation run by the intelligence organization

responsible for collecting scientific and technological

information for Country A paid a U.S. government employee to

obtain U.S. classified military intelligence documents.

Several citizens of Country A were caught in the United States

stealing sensitive technology used in manufacturing artillery

gun tubes.

Agents of Country A allegedly stole design plans for a classified

reconnaissance system from a U.S. company and gave them

to a defense contractor from Country A.

A company from Country A is suspected of surreptitiously

monitoring a DOD telecommunications system to obtain

classified information for Country A intelligence.

Citizens of Country A were investigated for allegations of

passing advanced aerospace design technology to

unauthorized scientists and researchers.

Country A is suspected of targeting U.S. avionics, missile

telemetry and testing data, and aircraft communication

systems for intelligence operations.

It has been determined that Country A targeted specialized

software that is used to store data in friendly aircraft warning

systems.

Country A has targeted information on advanced materials and

coatings for collection. A Country A government agency

allegedly obtained information regarding a chemical finish used

on missile reentry vehicles from a U.S. person.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Here's more from 1996:

http://www.washington-report.org/backissues/0496/9604014.htm

Pentagon, GAO Report Israeli Espionage And Illegal Technology Retransfer

by Shawn L. Twing

Washington Report on Middle East Affairs

April 1996, pgs. 14, 113

The new year started off on a sour note for the controversial U.S.-Israeli "strategic relationship" when two reports from the Department of Defense and one from the General Accounting Office (GAO) highlighted Israel's espionage activities against the United States and Israeli thefts of U.S. military technology secrets, and confirmed that Israel has illegally retransferred U.S. technology from the largely U.S.-funded Lavi fighter program to China.

The first round of revelations began with a report in the February issue of Moment, a Jewish monthly published in Washington, DC. The magazine described a Defense Investigative Service (DIS) warning to U.S. defense contractors about espionage by U.S. allies. One of the counterintelligence profiles provided with the memo detailed Israeli "espionage intentions and capabilities" aimed at the United States (see p. 113 for the full text of the DIS Counterintelligence Profile). The memo was sent to defense contractors last October by the Syracuse, NY-based agency responsible for issuing security clearances to Department of Defense employees and defense contractors.

[According to the Washington Post, "the memo said that the country's recruitment techniques include 'ethnic targeting, financial aggrandizement, and identification and exploitation of individual frailties' of U.S. citizens. 'Placing Israeli nationals in key industries... is a technique utilized with great success', the memo said."]

Shortly after the Moment story appeared, Anti-Defamation League (ADL) executive director Abraham Foxman protested that the profile "impugns American Jews and borders on anti-Semitism" because of its reference to the potential security threat posed by individuals having "strong ethnic ties" to Israel, a euphemism for American Jews.

The Pentagon responded to Foxman by canceling the memo and promising not to issue a similar one in the future. In a letter to Foxman, Assistant Secretary of Defense for military intelligence Emmett Paige, Jr. wrote that, "The content of [the DIS counterintelligence profile] does not reflect the official position of the Department of Defense." He added that, "We have instructed appropriate personnel that similar documents will not be produced in the future."

OK, so one letter from the ADL is all it takes for the Department of Defense to put tail between the legs and roll over.

Yomar - did you catch that part about "identification and exploitation of individual frailties' of U.S. citizens"? That's gov-speak for bugging people's phones and blackmailing them.

And more:

The third revelation of Israel's violation of its privileged security relationship with the United States came from the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). Its 36-page report, "Worldwide Challenges to Naval Strike Warfare," contained the first unclassified confirmation by the U.S. government that Israel has retransferred sensitive U.S. military technology to China. In reference to the Israeli-Chinese military relationship, the report reads, in part: "U.S. technology has been acquired through Israel in the form of the Lavi fighter and possibly [surface-to-air] missile technology." Prior to the release of the ONI report, U.S. intelligence officials had been unwilling to state publicly what has become an open secret: that Israel violated U.S. law and numerous agreements with the United States by providing China with sensitive U.S. technology that has the potential to threaten U.S. national security interests directly (for a report on Israel's illegal retransfer of Lavi technology, see the January 1996 Washington Report, p. 12).

[gbear]

Fan since 62,

What part of my post irked you? The first part was pure tongue and cheek about people who take the time have an even shot at being Republican or Dem?

Do you dispute that the majority of people in the US can't tell you much about current events? Do you think it's feasable for us to follow all of the political issues? Do you dispute the incredibly short news cycle? We simply don't see all of the big things as big things unless they are here?

When Sharon went to the wailing wall, who here realised a second intafada was about to start? It's not like the conflict between Israel and Palestine has had no impact on our foreign policy. Our news simply is not good at recognizing historical importance as things happen, and for the most part our public isn't good at maintaining interest long enough to make it worth tv time to go back and cover what has happened months or often years ago. I guess I consider that just recognizing a weakness in our political consiousness. Sorry if that comes across as elitist. That's not really my intention

[Art]

Yomar, you're right. I was talking to ASF, not you. Sorry.

ASF, your hit and run tactics are intriguing, but, boorish. After having your latest flavor of the month post derailed as the nonsense it was, you've now moved on to newer nonsensical flavor of the month posts.

For the record, I think all of America knows the Israeli mob is tied with drugs. I think no one is more concerned with the Israeli mob than we are with the Russian mob or the Yakuza or our own mob. You make it sound like organized crime run by Israel in the U.S. is an affront to us when every damn country in the world has organized crime operations running here and throughout the world.

Where have you been man?

There are, in addition, government sponsored spying on our country by nations like Israel, China, France, Iraq, and, well, the list is probably about the whole world. And, we spy on the rest of the world too. That's kind of normal. Are you just figuring out that there may be spying going on among friends? Again, where've you been?

Your art student diatribe was exposed for the lark it was, not only by anyone actually bothering to read it, but by the author himself who came to know conclusions and had no attributed quotes, other than a CIA statement that he's making too big a deal out of what appears to be very little to make a big deal out of. That, I know, to a conspiracy theorist is the tipping point though.

Once the government says there's nothing wrong, there's something wrong. That's how you function.

Why you've decided to join the crowd of intolerant bigots who hate the Jews and blame them for the world's problems is beyond me. But, to this point you've done nothing but prove if you see "Israel" attached to anything that it is the worst thing in the world. Wherever you move in this world let me assure you of two things. Israel is spying on that country too. And, that country is spying on the U.S.

So, you won't get far by leaving.

[Glenn X]

ASF, welcome home.

Don't forget to tip the concierge.

[Burgold]

I think I got it now. Americans are sheep who will eat anything fed to them and believe it. Isreal is the supreme superpower in the world with its strings and whims controlling every facet of world events.

We are supposed to believe this despite the fact that even though the Isrealis control all communications and can blackmail you into extinction... you are posting these negative thoughts about them on a non secure message board and that you are able to find numerous articles printed by the Isreali controlled media that suggests they have engaged in acts of wrong doing. Unless, you believe that all the journalists you have presented to us have been "suicided" and that you are in fact risking self-execution by presenting these theories, then even you don't believe what you have written. This level of blame as others have suggested is not new.

[laurent]

You guys may want to check this article out, I guess it fits in nicely with the subject matter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm

[Henry]

Originally posted by laurent

You guys may want to check this article out, I guess it fits in nicely with the subject matter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/correspondent/3028585.stm

Funny how this board full of brainwashed conservatives already found a similar article from the Toronto Star more than a week ago.

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26921&highlight=lynch

Also, note how the BBC story makes this comment:

Witnesses told us that the special forces knew that the Iraqi military had fled a day before they swooped on the hospital.

No quote there. No attribution at all. just 'witnesses."

The Star article, however, gives this quote:

Three days after the raid, the doctors had a visit from one of their U.S. military counterparts. He came, they say, to thank them for the superb surgery.

"He was an older doctor with gray hair and he wore a military uniform," Raazk said.

"I told him he was very welcome, that it was our pleasure. And then I told him: `You do realize you could have just knocked on the door and we would have wheeled Jessica down to you, don't you?'

"He was shocked when I told him the real story. That's when I realized this rescue probably didn't happen for propaganda reasons. I think this American army is just such a huge machine, the left hand never knows what the right hand is doing."

It's quite telling, isn't it, that the supposed unbiased, un-influenced, BBC article is the one that resorts to innuendo and unsubstantiated claims to support it's story.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Henry

Funny how this board full of brainwashed conservatives already found a similar article from the Toronto Star more than a week ago.

http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=26921&highlight=lynch

Right -- except the story keeps getting worse and worse. Laurent posted an abbreviated update from the BBC. The Guardian in the U.K. is carrying the full story that was abbreviated in that report.

Here's a highlight:

In the early hours of April 2, correspondents in Doha were summoned from their beds to Centcom, the military and media nerve centre for the war. Jim Wilkinson, the White House's top figure there, had stayed up all night. "We had a situation where there was a lot of hot news," he recalls. "The president had been briefed, as had the secretary of defence."

The journalists rushed in, thinking Saddam had been captured. The story they were told instead has entered American folklore. Private Lynch, a 19-year-old clerk from Palestine, West Virginia, was a member of the US Army's 507th Ordnance Maintenance Company that took a wrong turning near Nassiriya and was ambushed. Nine of her US comrades were killed. Iraqi soldiers took Lynch to the local hospital, which was swarming with fedayeen, where he was held for eight days. That much is uncontested.

Releasing its five-minute film to the networks, the Pentagon claimed that Lynch had stab and bullet wounds, and that she had been slapped about on her hospital bed and interrogated. It was only thanks to a courageous Iraqi lawyer, Mohammed Odeh al-Rehaief, that she was saved. According to the Pentagon, Al-Rehaief risked his life to alert the Americans that Lynch was being held.

Just after midnight, Army Rangers and Navy Seals stormed the Nassiriya hospital. Their "daring" assault on enemy territory was captured by the military's night-vision camera. They were said to have come under fire, but they made it to Lynch and whisked her away by helicopter. That was the message beamed back to viewers within hours of the rescue.

...

The doctors told us that the day before the special forces swooped on the hospital the Iraqi military had fled. Hassam Hamoud, a waiter at a local restaurant, said he saw the American advance party land in the town. He said the team's Arabic interpreter asked him where the hospital was. "He asked: 'Are there any Fedayeen over there?' and I said, 'No'." All the same, the next day "America's finest warriors" descended on the building.

"We heard the noise of helicopters," says Dr Anmar Uday. He says that they must have known there would be no resistance. "We were surprised. Why do this? There was no military, there were no soldiers in the hospital.

"It was like a Hollywood film. They cried, 'Go, go, go', with guns and blanks and the sound of explosions. They made a show - an action movie like Sylvester Stallone or Jackie Chan, with jumping and shouting, breaking down doors." All the time with the camera rolling.

Despite the best attempts of folks to spin this, it's quite clear that the military completed its "rescue" mission of Lynch -- which possibly included the use of blank bullets and illusive pyrotechnics -- sat down and edited the film, under direct White House supervision, and presented it to the media as the story of a daring recovery operation against armed resistance, to rescue a soldier who was shot and being actively beaten in the hospital.

This is not "fog of war" confusion. This is, at minimum, deliberate deception after the fact, complete with misleading video "proof". It's even possible the entire operation was a charade from the start, if the report of blanks being used for bullets is true.

The latest vicious twist to the lies is the suggestion that Lynch "may never remember" what happened to her. Right....

This crap is in plain sight, right in front of your eyes, and yet somehow I'm nuts to question 9/11 when the *only* smoking gun tying Osama bin Laden is a video with a garbled audio track and an English translation that has been demonstrated to be a misleading fabrication.

Let me know when the complete story of these fabrications hits Fox News. The Lynch expose is running this Sunday on BBC2 at 7:15 pm.

P.S. to Henry: Nice try with the spinning. The "witnesses" who alerted the U.S. to the departure of the Fedayeen are not unnamed. One of them is named in the excerpt above: Hassam Hamoud.

[Burgold]

"It was like a Hollywood film. They cried, 'Go, go, go', with guns and blanks and the sound of explosions. They made a show - an action movie like Sylvester Stallone or Jackie Chan, with jumping and shouting, breaking down doors." All the time with the camera rolling."

I suppose it's possible, but it strains credibility. First, how would the doctors know that they were blanks. Second, the soldiers would have to be certain to an ungodly degree about the safety of the mission to effectively go in there unarmed. Third, it really sounds incredibly similar to when the Information Minister said, there are no US tanks in... etc.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Burgold

"It was like a Hollywood film. They cried, 'Go, go, go', with guns and blanks and the sound of explosions. They made a show - an action movie like Sylvester Stallone or Jackie Chan, with jumping and shouting, breaking down doors." All the time with the camera rolling."

I suppose it's possible, but it strains credibility. First, how would the doctors know that they were blanks. Second, the soldiers would have to be certain to an ungodly degree about the safety of the mission to effectively go in there unarmed.

Burgold, you're right: the part about the blanks does strain credulity. As to how doctors could know, it's easy to discern blanks if the shots are in an enclosed area and nothing is being hit.

If this were just "he said, she said" about the blanks, I'd be inclined to disbelieve the blanks theory. But we have the very real corroborating evidence of the military presenting a false story and misleading video *after the fact* to the press. This tends to remove any credibility in this story from the Americans, and give more weight to the testimony of the doctors.

I'd still like to see more evidence about the blanks before believing that part of the story. As it stands, the actions of the U.S. military propagandists in this incident clearly support the possibility that the operation was a charade from the start, with blanks being used.

[Burgold]

There's an absolute difference between charade and propaganda. Jessica Lynch was certainly used as positive feel-good propaganda. The US millitary controlled where the press went and so what images we got to see. That control led to a picture that was biased in their favor. However, to go from bias or positive spin to charade is a much bigger jump. It's the difference between self-censoring and outright lying. The advantages of pulling off this Hollywood stunt in real term with real people all about without being able to determine/control the complicity of all the players makes it unlikely. Again, you would be asking soldiers who by the doctors own words infer they had never entered that site before to enter an unknown area unarmed. It may have "appeared" safe, but that's what ambushes are known for. There were incidents of civillian dressed ambushes reported. You would have to expect, the journalists, production crews, millitary men, Iraqi people, and soldiers would all keep silent. You would have to hope that Jessica Lynch would play along and any other surviving captured soldier. That's just too many independent variables to believe it's a pure fabrication. Safety issues aside, there are too many people who could ruin the scheme. It's a little like those who say the moon landing was a hoax. That's possible too, but it strains credibility.

[Henry]

The witnesses were most certainly unnamed in the BBC story on the website. And look at the quote you provided. All Hamoud says is "He asked: 'Are there any Fedayeen over there?' and I said, 'No'." The writer fills in the rest of the blanks himself. Again, that's known as bias.

Here's a more lengthy quote from Hamoud in the Toronto Star story:

"They asked me if any troops were still in the hospital and I said `No, they're all gone.' Then they asked about Uday Hussein, and again, I said `No,'" Hamoud said. "The translator seemed satisfied with my answers, but the soldiers were very nervous."

Please tell me you see the difference in the way the same man's words are presented. One story chops it up and the other does not. I'm inclined to believe the latter.

[Atlanta Skins Fan]

Originally posted by Burgold

There's an absolute difference between charade and propaganda. Jessica Lynch was certainly used as positive feel-good propaganda. The US millitary controlled where the press went and so what images we got to see. That control led to a picture that was biased in their favor. However, to go from bias or positive spin to charade is a much bigger jump. It's the difference between self-censoring and outright lying.

Burgold, again, even I am having trouble believing the blanks part, though almost nothing would surprise me at this point.

But I'm concerned because you're whitewashing the rest of the story as "feel good propaganda" as opposed to lying.

Let's be clear: the Lynch story was a concerted, deliberate lie, fabricated under direct White House supervision, and presented to the media *after the operation was over* and when the basic facts had to be known.

The only distinction that is in doubt is determing exactly which lie we're dealing with:

1. The military and White House conducted this as a charade from the start (blank bullets)
   
2. The military believed the hospital was unguarded, and staged the rescue operation, but with real bullets in case their military intelligence was faulty -- and later fabricated the story that was presented, under White House supervision
   

Lying isn't spinning. The only question is whether a charade preceded the elaborately fabricated lie, which was present in either scenario.

One telling clue about the charade question was the presence of cameras in the first place. Rescue missions against armed opposition are some of the most dangerous and heroic military operations possible. You don't take camera crews along for the most difficult missions where even the rescue team can fall victim, a la Black Hawk Down.

There is an explanation that incorporates the prior intelligence about the hospital being unarmed, the testimony of the doctors about blanks and illusive pyrotechnics, and the always present possibility of danger in any military operation, which would tend to preclude the use of blanks. Obviously if the military was expecting to be conducting a charade but wanted to guard against surprise and ambush, they could arm only some of the soldiers with blanks, and those would be the soldiers shooting initially.