GEORGE BUSH EATING CROW & MEDIA HUMILIATION

 

George W. Bush Enjoying a Crow

Throughout the last 3 years of violence in Syria, I have written frequently about the “trigger words” the Western media used to psychologically manipulate their audiences.  Under the spell of intelligence organizations like CIA, NSA, MI6, BND, MIT and the DGSE, western journalism took a detour away from ethics and responsibility and embraced the malefic world of illusion and deceit.

It manifested itself with a concatenation of words and phrases all intended to hit the reader at the headline level.  It is true, or so the CIA thinks,  that most readers of American newspapers scan headlines without actually reading the content of the articles critically.  This is usually an indication that Americans are heading straight for the Comics Section or the Sports Page.  It’s just the way it is.  And, many of these people, are going to be interviewed by pollsters who will ask how they feel about the U.S. and NATO attacking Syria.  Well, if the average person’s knowledge is garnered from the headlines scientifically constructed by psyops experts in McLean, Virginia, the average American is going to push for war.  Right?  Right?

Wrong.

Americans are more clever than that and can smell a rat from a mile away.  Besides being exhausted after decades of failed international adventures which cost the national treasury trillions and took the lives of thousands of young men and women, Americans can detect the odor of conspiracy.  They are repulsed by it. They know when their own media sources are compromised.  When it came to Syria, in poll after poll, Americans said “no” to involvement in that country’s conflict.  And, why?  Was it because many were turning to the Alternative Media?  The pollsters never explained because their job was to get the answers to the questions – they were not tasked with finding out how much Americans really knew about the war there.  They were not supposed to know, anyways,  because all they ever read are headlines.  Right? That should have been enough.  Instead of finding out why Americans did not want involvement, the pollsters (themselves agents of shadowy agencies) speculated that it was war weariness which controlled the answers and they would publish their specious opinions accordingly.  This is how they handled the entire affair.

SyrPer conducted its own poll – totally unscientific and anecdotal to be sure.  But, I think my poll is more accurate than Gallups or Zogby’s.  In conversations with more than one hundred Americans of every stripe, I found out that Americans don’t just read headlines.  Most people told me they were against “that” war, because they did not want to help Alqaeda.  My notes show, also, that many said they didn’t know enough about Dr. Assad and didn’t trust their own American government to tell them.  Some just said it wasn’t their business to regulate the world. It was an amazing finding.

That the Western narrative failed is obvious to all.  Think of all the media powerhouses involved:  BBC, LeMonde, New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Sun, ABC, NBC, PBS, CBS, Huffington, Reuters, CBC and even some small change CIA/Fascist sources like Daily Star and Albawaba.  Think of all the media “stars” who can grab a headline by kiting stories of horrific human rights violations like Human Rights Watch,  Doctors Without Borders and Amnesty International – each one of them polluted beneficiaries of Saudi and Qatari bribes.  Then, think of all the “hired guns” like senile Senator McCain, Senator Cruz, Tony Blair, Laurent Fabius and the German entertainer and clown, Guido Westerwelle.  An amazing constellation of galaxies!  What is loyal Syrian man to do in the light of such stellar forces?

It is certain the media giants and their minions know they failed miserably in communicating the Western narrative to the average man or woman.  The Reuters news service, owned by the Rothschilds, a Zionist-Jewish family infected with the most venal of predilections, and the most venereal of passions, bombed in article after article in which the government of Syria was regularly referred to as a “regime” whilst the terrorists from all countries but Syria were called “rebels”.  The fact that everyone knew most of the terrorists were foreigners did not make any difference to them, because, you see, they were “on board”, anxious to get the big scoop from Foggy Bottom, if and only if they toed the line.

Words and phrases were designed by clever wordsmiths in McLean to “grab the readers’s attention”.  “Regime Bombs Civilian Neighborhood”……. “Assad Leaves Capital”, “Rebels Push into Damascus”, “Regime Used Poison Gas on Civilian Centers”, “Rebels Vow to Overthrow Tyranny”………and the list goes on ad nauseam.  Because Dr. Assad is a polyglot, diffident, dweebish sort, Western media did not want to showcase him in interviews unless they could batter him with difficult questions.  For example, when a Turkish television crew went to Damascus to interview him, Erdoghan was reportedly livid and threatened to close down their station.  Erdoghan knew that the moment people heard him speak he would not be thought of as a “tyrant”, “killer” or “brute”.  Charley Rose, whom people think of as mild, objective and “interesting” struck out as he tried to elicit ridiculous views from our president.  It was as though Rose was told that Dr. Assad was like Saddam or Stalin.  Of course if Saddam or Stalin were subjected to Rose’s moronic antics, it is doubtful he would have awakened to a Full Monty the next morning.

 

 

And then, this buffoon-like crew of German interviewers got into Damascus to talk to Dr. Assad and the first question they asked was the disarming: “Mr. President, do you love your country?”  All these shenanigans got them nowhere as people who tuned in found out that Assad was charming, articulate and disturbingly calm, just like his father, or, maybe, just like a surgeon.  Why did they call his government a regime?  Why did the West always refer to him as “besieged”, “embattled”, “surrounded”, and using other adjectives such as “tottering”, “desperate”, “frantic” and the like?  And they won’t stop.  It’s like Dick Cheney, whose unwillingness to admit he lied to the American people about Saddam’s WMDs, remains as mythical as the boy who cried wolf or Pinocchio’s nose.

No.  I really do not believe the media will ever admit to being bag boys for the diplomats in D.C., London or Paris, Doha or Riyadh, Ankara or Ottawa.  They will eat their ebony canard quietly crowned with a dollop of salt. In the meantime, the Syrian Army will eradicate the rats and Dr. Assad will win any election for president hands down.  Ziad

Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
wpDiscuz