• All governments lie, but disaster lies in wait for countries whose officials smoke the same hashish they give out.

  • I.F. Stone

donderdag 6 november 2014

Media Corruptie 26


Voordat ik verder ga met een analyse van de werkwijze van opiniemaker Hubert Smeets, eerst enkele feiten over de neoliberale macht:

[There] 'is a memo [at the Pentagon] that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.' 
General Wesley Clark, former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO (1997-2000), (March 2, 2007)

'I don’t want to just end the [Iraq] war, but I want to end the mind-set that got us into war in the first place.' 
Presidential candidate Barack Obama, (January 31, 2008)

'Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power.' 
Abraham Lincoln (1809—1865), 16th President of the United States (1861-65)

When the U.S. government of George W. Bush (2001-2009) decided to illegally invade militarily the country of Iraq and overthrow the government of Saddam Hussein, against the advice of many thinking persons, it opened a 'Pandora Box' of woes that is still spewing out its calamities today, and probably will for many years to come. This is the first and foremost cause of the current quagmire prevailing in Iraq and in Syria today.

In 2009, the Barack Obama administration thought that it could wash its hands and walk away from the 'biggest mistake in American military history' and let local Iraqi politicians sort things out and form an 'inclusive' government in Baghdad. Here is what President Obama said on February 27, 2009:

'Let me say this as plainly as I can: by August 31, 2010, our combat mission in Iraq will end… Through this period of transition, we will carry out further redeployments. And under the Status of Forces Agreement with the Iraqi government [negotiated by the previous Bush administration], I intend to remove all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011.'

Well, as it should have been expected by anybody who has any knowledge of history in that part of the world, Iraq was far from being a stable 'democracy.' Instead, the Shi’ite-led and paranoid Malaki government was everything but “inclusive” of the Sunni minority. Indeed, the Shi’ite-controlled Iraqi government was bent on taking revenge on the Sunnis for the suffering Shi’ites endured under the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. Using the sophisticated military gear supplied by the U.S., it tracked down Sunni opposition and dissenters to the regime, many were killed, and it excluded prominent Sunni politicians from the government.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/divide-and-rule-america-ignites-a-politico-religious-civil-war-in-iraq-and-in-syria/5412080


Dr. Norman Finkelstein, PhD Political Science, Princeton, prolific author, descendant of Holocaust death camp victims and son of survivors of the Warsaw Ghetto, on the 'Enabler in Chief' of the 2014 Israeli massacre against the trapped Palestinian refugees:

It became, straight out, just a terror assault.  The mosques, the schools, the hospitals, the ambulances, the civilians.  You’d have to be blinder than King Lear not to see what was going on.  It was just a pure terrorist attack.

By the end of it, the head of the International Community of the Red Cross, he said, and I’m quoting him, 'I have never seen such massive destruction ever before.' And the normally comatose puppet of the United States, UN secretary general Ban ki Moon, he said, “Such massive deaths and destruction have shocked and shamed the world.”

Now, in the last thirty seconds, we have to ask ourselves, who or what allowed that to happen?  And there can be no question whatsoever.  None.

The Enabler in Chief of that massacre in Gaza, the Enabler in Chief of that death and destruction, was president Barack Obama.

That is not rhetorical.  That is not a cheap shot.  That’s a fact.  I don’t say it as a person on the political left.  I don’t say it as a member of the Tea Party.  I say it as someone who is simply observing the facts.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/11/enabler-chief-2014-massacre-palestinian-refugees.html 


In the giddy wake of Obama’s 2008 election, Democrats almost immediately plotted ways to keep their army of newer, younger voters mobilized as a continuous standing force, exerting constant pressure on Congress to deliver the change they had demanded. There would be meet-ups, there would be emails, and there would be even more emails.

None of it worked. The Obama movement melted away almost immediately, withdrawing from politics even before the new president had taken office. The face of grassroots political activism during Obama’s first two years was the furious, disbelieving backlash that had emerged in the waning days of 2008. Democrats plotted tactics to bring their voters back out for the 2010 elections, but these proved a dismal failure — the midterm electorate proved to be much older and whiter than the one that had elected the president.


Ik citeer deze recente commentaren omdat ze een heldere context schetsen waarin de NAVO-propaganda en de anti-Rusland-hetze van Smeets meer is dan de gekte van iemand die niet beter weet. Zoals bij iedere dwaas, die een politiek spel speelt, zit er ook in de gekte van Hubert Smeets een levensgevaarlijk aspect. Kenmerkend voor propagandisten is dat ze enerzijds blijven streven naar erkenning door de macht, en anderzijds dat ze blijven weigeren de eigen persoonlijke verantwoordelijkheid te accepteren, en dus niet in discussie durven te gaan met bijvoorbeeld kritische vakgenoten. Terwijl het ene na het andere wetenschappelijke rapport over de ernstige gevolgen van de 'global warming' verschijnt, terwijl de kloof tussen arm en rijk blijft toenemen, terwijl economen hebben uitgerekend dat als iedere wereldbewoner even welvarend zou zijn als een westerling er dan vier aardes nodig zijn, terwijl de uitputting van onmisbare grondstoffen binnen afzienbare tijd een grote bedreiging zal vormen, terwijl door het neoliberalisme slechts 1 procent van de allerrijksten nu evenveel bezit als de helft van de mensheid, terwijl op dinsdag 4 november 2014 'Plutocrats Win Control of Congress,' waardoor Washington nog bedreigender wordt voor de wereldvrede, terwijl het afgelopen decennium de door de NAVO begonnen oorlogen in het Midden Oosten en Noord-Afrika in totale chaos zijn geëindigd, terwijl 'jobless growth' leidt tot een structurele werkloosheid in het Westen, terwijl zelfs vooraanstaande Amerikaanse politici en intellectuelen verklaren dat de VS geen democratie is, maar een plutocratie, terwijl 'New data reveals… that Europe is the sick man of the global economy once again,' blijft Hubert Smeets beweren dat ook Rusland de weg moet bewandelen die de neoliberale plutocratie voor de mensheid heeft uitgestippeld. Ondertussen verspreidt hij geen feiten, maar vooral meningen, suggesties, verdachtmakingen, roddels, complotten. Het nieuwste complot is deze:

Konstantin Borovoi (ex-adviseur Jeltsin, ex-Doema) zegt: 'adj. sec.gen. NATO Alexander Vershbow werkt voor Kremlin.'

De Russische geheime dienst is tot in de NAVO-top geïnfiltreerd, de paranoia ten tijde van het Mccarthyisme is weer helemaal terug. De Russen komen!!! Zandzakken voor de deur!!! Naar de schuilkelders!!! Bewapenen!!! 

In zijn boek Understanding a Photograph (2013) schrijft de grote Britse auteur John Berger over 'the deepest universal reaction to the stuff of modern politics' het volgende:

It is disgust at that particular kind of sordidness which exudes from those who now wield individual political power. This sordidness is not a confirmation of the abstract moral belief that all power corrupts. It is a specific historical and political phenomenon. It could not occur in a theocracy or a secure feudal society. It must await the principle of modern democracy and then the cynical manipulating of that principle. It is endemic in, but by no means exclusive to, latter-day bourgeois politics and advanced capitalism. It is nurtured from the gulf between the aims a politician claims and the actions he has in fact already decided upon.

It is not born of personal deception or hypocrisy as such. Rather, it is born of the manipulator's assurance, of his own indifference to the flagrant contradiction which he himself displays between words and actions, between noble sentiments and routine practice. It resides in his complacent trust in the hidden undemocratic power of the state. Before each public appearance he knows that his words are only for those whom they can persuade, and that with those whom they do not there are other ways of dealing. Note this sordidness when watching the next party political broadcast. 

Een tijdlang nam Hubert Smeets op de locale Amsterdamse televisiezender deel aan een panel dat, onder leiding van Felix Rottenberg, politieke issues besprak. Telkens zodra Smeets in beeld kwam, begonnen de zenuwen rond zijn ogen te trekken. Die zenuwtrek was hinderlijk, omdat de kijker erdoor werd afgeleid. Hoe opgewondener Hubert Smeets raakte, des te meer zijn zenuwtrek opspeelde. Maar ziedaar, de zenuwtrek is niet meer. Uiteindelijk is Smeets daadwerkelijk in zijn eigen leugens gaan geloven. Zo genezend werken de mainstream-media voor mensen met een stoornis. 






Geen opmerkingen:

Een reactie plaatsen