propaganda

[Zoomerang96]

bush similiar to hitler?

i will try and keep this short.

any of you nazi history buffs remember what hitler and his foreign affairs minister von ribbentrop were like to austria, czech republic, and poland up to and including 1939?

hitler along with goebbels used propaganda to tell the german people about how dangerous those countries were. correction sorry, they said poland was aggravating them. the other two they believed belonged to the fatherland to begin with.

hitler made it known to his people about how dangerous poland was. poland, as it turned out, resorted to using horses against the german panzers on september 1, 1993. thats why i believe the war in poland was effectively over in less than a month.

today george bush is telling his people how terrible iraq is WITHOUT citing evidence, just like hitler did. every time bush or cheney is on the television they say "we have evidence that they are trying to obtain weapons of mass destruction...blah blah blah." alright then, wheres the evidence? isnt it fair to say nearly EVERY country in the world would LIKE to have weapons of mass destruction?

that said, who gave the americans the right to decide who CAN and who CANNOT use these horrific tools of horror? history has shown us this far that ONLY the americans have in fact used atomic weapons - twice on the japanese in the second world war.

oh, and if my memory serves me correctly, there were a few civilian casualties...

bush and his staff are war hungery theives who want their oil cheaper.

bush and his staff are similiar to hitler and his in the way they did not heed the worlds warnings to what appears to EVERYONE outside the us as an aggressive act of war.

im sorry i had little time to write this, and my thoughts may not have been very focused or clear.

hopefully you can still see what im saying.

 

[daisybean]

I see what you are saying.....

Bush's popularity soared with the attacks on Afghanistan after 9/11. Now that things are "settling down," his popularity is waning, and I think he wants to give it a boost. With the Bin Ladin's network quiet at the moment, Bush needs an enemy to fight. Saddam has been a thorn in America's side as it were, therefore an easy target.

 

[AcrobatMan]

for a person who has such incredible powers, he is doing quite well not to misuse it too much.

 

[Hi Bias]

A lot of members will be upset that you even pose this question. When they hear ?Hitler? they think the holocaust, WW2, and all the war crimes.

But, the suspicion that Iraq could be about oil, and who controls it and gets the benefit is not unreasonable. The U S has provoked wars for their own agenda in the past. President Polk provoked a war with Mexico to grab most of the western U S. Lincoln was against it, and I believe this cost him an election to the U S congress. Many believe F D Roosevelt wanted an act of aggression from Japan to get the isolationist American public to support entry into that war.

 

[Danospano]

Yes, I tend to agree that comparing Bush to Hitler isn't necessary at the moment. That doesn't mean there isn't potential. While I don't think that he could lead another holocaust type genocide, I do believe he could convince the American public to give up liberties in the name of war. This is so scary, but unless we as Americans demand our rights, they'll very slowly disappear and it will take forever to regain them to the current extent .

 

[rafmed]

Goebbles Propaganda was one of the most important weapons for the Nazi regime, and it has been used in similar way since then many times in every place of the earth.

In this, the times of the boom of comunication, we may think we are immune to this kind of propaganda, I think on the other hand the means to get unbiassed information are at our reach.

I don't think, on the other hand that Bush should be compared to Hitler, because that implies a lot of other things.

 

[diamond]

Bear-
This is an example your lameness reaching new heights.
Good job.
DB9

 

[Lilly]

i think perhaps the initial purpose of this thread was not to compare hitler to bush, but perhaps the time periods and situations that are implied in those eras.

pre-WWII, america was in a state of isolationism, taking care of its own ecobnomy after the great depression. when the war broke out in europe, america saw that as a perfect opportunity to be isolationist but still help the war and, moreover, make a profit. which it did. our steel companies and factories were booming with success. when the strike on pearl harbor occurred, and we DID get into the war, the propaganda was flying left and right. it's not until early 1942 that the charicature-type drawings with extremely racist slogans began to surface. as our propaganda campaign heightened, support for a war that, in the beginning, americans were split over became huge. it had worked on the american public. and it made the war(s) easier to fight because the government didn't have to combat its public and an enemy (read: vietnam). it also united the country against the enemy because the germans, the italians, the japanese were not seen as people living their lives, but as evil plotters intending to kill us good americans at any second ( ).


on september 11th and the weeks that followed, americans swallowed that it was bin laden and that we were going to obliterate he and his terrorist networks. but as time progressed, it was recognized that we didn't know exactly who did this to us, and they aren't all of one culture and they don't all believe the same thing and you can't tell who they are by looking at them (all things previously manipulated to create propaganda). now more of us are starting to wake up and realize what has been going on. it is getting more and more obvious that we are being told blind-faced lies.

this upcoming war-ish-could-be-could-not-be thing is going to be a combination of vietnam (circa 1967-1970) and the beginning of WWII. the government will pretend we have a righteous purpose in being there, but will get no support from home because as of this moment, we've no evidence of anything going on there.

that said, who gave the americans the right to decide who CAN and who CANNOT use these horrific tools of horror?

i don't know how the U.S got designated that "right." especially when, as you noted, we are the only country to have actually used atomic bombs. i think we can all agree that no one wants anyone to have these weapons, and the faster we ALL get rid of them the better.

 

[bonoman]

The compraison with Poland and Iraq is laughable. I think everyone in the world knows that Saddam is crazy enough to use weapons of mass distrustion unannounced and unprovoked. Dont let the hate and anger you ahve for the US clud this descsion. If it were Canada stepping up would u be so hostile?

But if this does not go ahead and Iraq lays a A-bomb down in America then what. Do we bitch that something should have happened. The world shouldnt be waiting to react to a attack they should be reacting now to prevent further ones.

 

[diamond]

This thread is completely idoitic
Bonoman u said it right

The reasons being-

Mass media and exposure in the free-press usually debunks 'propaganda' and hype.

All GW is doing is building a coalition/consenus before he takes out a Nortorious,mudering dictator. To attempt to spin it otherwise makes you guilty of yellow journalism .

thats all I feel like writing now

-diamond-

 

[U2Bama]

I find this thread and its original title to be offensive.

 

[Zoomerang96]

diamond, you actually believe everything you hear?!

you dont think the media is in on everything?

i like the title of propaganda better, thanks to whichever mod changed it.

diamond there is hardly anything lame about what im saying. dig a little further about this, rather than watching the first five minutes of World New Tonite.

though to be fair, i find them to be quite a bit better than fox news, though fox is notoriously right wing.

i have a question for you people who disagree with me...

how many people, innocent UNARMED civilians in afghanistan were killed due to allied bombing?

first, lets remember how many people died in washington and new york, AND the pittsburg airplane.

wasnt much more than 3000 was it? im not sure on the total, but im positive it was below 4000.

the united nations and the mcc concedes that over !!!!5000!!!! civilians have been killed in afghanistan due to stray bombs. even if we went an eye for an eye, we still killed more of them than "they" killed of us!

that doesnt even include all the people who were injured and left homeless.

----

remember a while back, i believe danospano posted a link of an abcnews.com story which cited EVIDENCE that the united states were going to purposely create a terrorist attack on american soil, but make it look like the cubans did it to give the american public a reason to believe that war was necessary? if you dont believe me, surely one of us can look back far enough and find it and show it again.

so dont give me any of that bullshit about sadam poisoning his own people. sure, if infact he DID do that, that is indeed awful, but dont forget about what the greatest president of all time did during vietnam. gosh darn were people pleased with the guy. vietnam was such a VITAL WAR AGAINST COMMUNISM.

good thing we won that won too, eh?

i think i feel more sorry for those soldiers than ww2 vets. they didnt even know why they were there.

so dont think your government doesnt harm your people, cause they do. there are always motives, you just have to dig deep enough to find them. and time always exposes the dirty deeds the evil have done.

bonoman: if canada would step up...well they wouldnt! we cant! its not even possible! we have a shambles of a military.
i dont hate the united states, rather i have a strong disliking of their abuse of power.


"Mass media and exposure in the free-press usually debunks 'propaganda' and hype."

lol. it debunks HYPE?!?! what are we talking about right now?!!? whats on the news all the time?! everyones talking about the possible war in iraq!! thats not hype?! then what is?! its bracing the american public for a full scale war, and its giving the bush adm ample time to create some more "evidence" to attack the "evil" in the world.

"All GW is doing is building a coalition/consenus before he takes out a Nortorious, mudering dictator. To attempt to spin it otherwise makes you guilty of yellow journalism."

you got it completely wrong! proof that propaganda HAS gotten to you! his coalition (of puppets on the international stage) has even grown a spine to resist boy george. canada, germany and others have already said no. even the uk isnt 100% definate on the issue. have you not even heard this?!

and for a final, but long point on that same note...

george is NOT taking a consensus. if he actually was, hed know that the whole world is against him. do you not know that...

1) george senior got congress approval in the early nineties to attack iraq. in court, as it turns out, this can be used AGAIN to attack iraq.

2) after the septemer 11 attacks, george junior got congressional approval to wage a war on international terrorism. that did NOT mean it could be restricted to afghanistan alone. george can use this too for...

starting a war on iraq all by himself. the closest thing to a dictator next to jean chretien who refused to step down until this week, but nevermind that.

so if bush really wants to, which were all sure he will, he can start the war on iraq immediately without further congress support.

*edited for spelling

 

[TylerDurden]

First of all, 'Weapons Of Mass Destruction' would be a good name for a band. Moving on....

Ive been undecided about where I stand with the whole Iraq thing for ages now. Depending on which day it was, who had said what, or what I had just read I could be on either side of the argument.

It has really heated up here in Australia because our government has said if the US goes, we go, and it really looks like the US is going. So all over radio, tv, newspapers, the debate is raging. Over the last week or so Ive read alot, heard alot, seen alot, debated alot.

Im glad Australia has supported the US so strongly since 9/11, Im happy with Aussie troops in the front line in Afghanistan. If a country poses a serious threat to the US, or the US is in trouble, Im fine with and would hope Australia would help.

But Ive come to the conclusion that the whole Iraq thing is rubbish.

I see what The Bear is saying about propaganda. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, none of them have actually given a good enough reason for an attack yet. Just big bold statements with no evidence to back them up, which Im sure makes alot of Americans happy, but it is nowhere near enough.

The American media is also being extremely poor on this one. 4 channels in a row on Australian tv are: Sky News Australia, BBC News, Fox News, CNN. The difference in the style of reporting is amazing. I wouldn't even call Fox a news channel. Its a joke, and is obviously aimed at the dumbest 5% of the population.
Americans, do yourself a favour and watch more BBC if you can. Welcome to the real world.
Ive read that the New York Times has dared to be critical of the US govt on Iraq and is getting blasted for it. Thats kinda Bear's point.

IF Iraq have these weapons, where is the evidence? IF there is evidence, the US wouldn't be the only country to have it, so why does no one else support an attack? IF the US has the evidence, surely they'd show countries like Germany and Canada quick smart to stop them making so much anti-US noise? Show them the evidence, shut them up, get their support, get on with it. Why haven't they?

IF there is evidence and IF Iraq has the weapons, why on earth would they use them against the US or Israel? Saddam Hussein may be crazy, but he's smart. He would know that the day he sends a missile into Israel, or is linked to a dirty bomb going off in New York, is going to be his last day on earth. I don't think he's that stupid or suicidal.

IF he has them, Id say he's just using his right as an independent sovereign nation to have some shit up his sleeve should someone attack. I think they are way more defensive weapons then offensive weapons. IF he has them.

So Iraq is ignoring UN Resolutions. SINCE WHEN has the US given a flying fuck about UN Resolutions? Is your army going to drive Israel out of the West Bank while you are in the area?

So Saddam has used these weapons before. 20 years ago. Where was the noise from the US then? Why does that mean he'd do it again? Out of nowhere?

What is going to happen after the US succesfully takes out Iraq? What is going to happen to Iraq?

What will the US do next? Convince the world we need to go get (insert country here)? Saudi Arabia? Pakistan?

Can China attack Taiwan now? Can India attack Pakistan now?




Convince me attacking Iraq is a good idea, and do it without using dumb arse cliches that sound like they come from Tom Clancy/George Bush.

 

[hiphop]

Re: bush similiar to hitler?

i will try and keep this short.

any of you nazi history buffs remember what hitler and his foreign affairs minister von ribbentrop were like to austria, czech republic, and poland up to and including 1939?

hitler along with goebbels used propaganda to tell the german people about how dangerous those countries were. correction sorry, they said poland was aggravating them. the other two they believed belonged to the fatherland to begin with.

hitler made it known to his people about how dangerous poland was. poland, as it turned out, resorted to using horses against the german panzers on september 1, 1993. thats why i believe the war in poland was effectively over in less than a month.

today george bush is telling his people how terrible iraq is WITHOUT citing evidence, just like hitler did. every time bush or cheney is on the television they say "we have evidence that they are trying to obtain weapons of mass destruction...blah blah blah." alright then, wheres the evidence? isnt it fair to say nearly EVERY country in the world would LIKE to have weapons of mass destruction?

that said, who gave the americans the right to decide who CAN and who CANNOT use these horrific tools of horror? history has shown us this far that ONLY the americans have in fact used atomic weapons - twice on the japanese in the second world war.

oh, and if my memory serves me correctly, there were a few civilian casualties...

bush and his staff are war hungery theives who want their oil cheaper.

bush and his staff are similiar to hitler and his in the way they did not heed the worlds warnings to what appears to EVERYONE outside the us as an aggressive act of war.

im sorry i had little time to write this, and my thoughts may not have been very focused or clear.

hopefully you can still see what im saying.

Sorry to disagree, I can?t see any similarity between Bush and Hitler except for the one that both were heavily supported by certain industries.

I don?t think Saddam Hussein is a fascist that will be overthrown by Bush who is Nazi. In Austria 1938, 98 percent of the population voted for Hitler; Dollfuss and his fascist crew were not enough, as it seems.
Poland was the country where the official war started.

I don?t agree with the U.S. foreign politics that, more than once, has provocated war and death for millions of people, imho. And sure, you can always say that the U.S. tries to "protect its interests" all over Latin America.

But the U.S. didn?t do a "Blitzkrieg", a fast surprise attack, to kind of conquer the world (they conquered it in another way). Bush didn?t put 6 millions of Jews into concentration camps.

 

[theSoulfulMofo]

Sins of the father... so forth and so on

May I interest you in this book:

Jacques Ellul's Propaganda

From a reader
Published in 1965, this book is a significant, if creepy study of that oft-misunderstood concept of propaganda. The references are unfortunately dated, but the insights are valuable, especially given how much propaganda is ignored in American society, particularly. It's not an easy read by any means, mostly because he throws so much at you at once you're sort of left punch-drunk. He lays it all out forthrightly.

The most terrible revelation he offers is when he points out that the most informed individuals (in the sense of consuming the most media) are the most propagandized (but unaware of being so). This is why this book doesn't get more play -- it would put the Massive Media and the "public relations" (aka, propaganda industry) out of business if people understood their real social role.

The book is bleak, and leaves you reeling. But it does provide intellectual ammunition -- namely, critical thinking -- as a hopeful vaccination from propaganda, except for Ellul's statement that people who think propaganda doesn't affect them tend to be propagandized....

I guess the safest thing you can do is assume you are a victim of propaganda, and then deal with it by sorting out what opinions are genuinely yours, and what are the result of "conventional wisdom" and "common sense". The alternative is to pretend you're somehow immune.

 

[Zoomerang96]

that book looks very interesting, i will pick that up as soon as im done with the book im on now.

i hope diamond reads at least the comment made about the book...

 

[Hi Bias]

MORE PROPAGANDA- Yeah, that's what they need.

U.S. to Probe Anti-Americanism




WASHINGTON (AP) - The State Department will host a two-day conference next week to explore the roots of anti-Americanism worldwide.

Spokesman Richard Boucher said about 20 scholars from the United States and abroad will share their thoughts with 50 State Department officials.

He said the department hopes the conference, set for Sept 5-6, will yield clues as to how to counter anti-Americanism.

The conference is the culmination of a project conducted by the department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research.

The bureau has already looked at the phenomenon in Europe, Russia and the Muslim world, Boucher said.

Since Sept. 11, the administration has been working harder to get its message across to Muslim countries, some of which demonstrated popular support for the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Secretary of State Colin Powell and other officials have given interviews to media outlets from Islamic countries. The department also has sponsored U.S. tours for media representatives from a number of Muslim countries.

Last March, the Voice of America launched a new 24-hour AM-FM station tailored for listeners in the Arab world.

 

[pinkfloyd]

Peace on Earth = POP MART

well , Hitler was a smart politician , however i hope Iraq and United States will come to peace solution , i will pray for it .


DREAM OUTLOUD

 

[diamond]

that book looks very interesting, i will pick that up as soon as im done with the book im on now.

i hope diamond reads at least the comment made about the book...

This book was writen 40 yrs ago.
Before CableNews.
Before Mass Media.
Before the Internet.

And if u read Hi-Bias post The Bush ppl do not think they r all high and mighty as they r finding out about the American resentment

DB9

 

[Zoomerang96]

actually diamond, i dont think you read hibias's post.

at least if you did, you certainly got a totally different perspective of it than i did.

diamond, just cause you have cable tv and internet connection does NOT mean that you cant be fooled!

you say that book is old, well you know what? propaganda is being used EVEN more now than ever!

diamond please, dont just watch the news without actually thinking about it a little.

 

[bonoman]

You know after reading Tyler Durdens post i am changing my opionin a bit.

Fuck this I as a citizen of the world want answers. I want a answer to the question everyone is asking. Give us hard evidence. A war on the magnitude that the US-Iraq qar qould be qould affect the whole world. My gas prices would go up, my friends would go to war and people will die. Why should we not have hard facts.

I am 99% sure Iraq has or is trying to obtain dangerous weapons. But some people arnt. Why should they not be convinced? You are very right who ever said that India could then attack Pakistan or China-Taiwan S. Korea-N. Korea. Will the US be opening a big can of worms. The US jumps into alot of situations trying to offer peace as a solution, they should take some of their own medicene.

I want a answer to my question the worlds question. I am sure we all think its happening but we want dont want to think its happening we want to know.

The only thing I nust critque of your post Tyler is this quote:

He would know that the day he sends a missile into Israel, or is linked to a dirty bomb going off in New York, is going to be his last day on earth. I don't think he's that stupid or suicidal.

He did send a missile into Israel and he might be linked to 9/11 he is still alive and thriving. I have no problem with a war on Iraq but it must be substaintated and a reason, a actual reason must be present.

Gees who would have ever thought someone could change someones mind in Free your Mind!!!

 

[Lilly]

The US jumps into alot of situations trying to offer peace as a solution, they should take some of their own medicene.

you don't think it's quirky that we offer peace as a solution either with threats of a severe bombing, amidst a severe bombing, or just after a severe bombing? yeah...it's not hypocritical or anything


i want to make sure that those who are not american posting in this thread realize that not all americans are convinced of the validity of a war in iraq either. we haven't seen proof, and we aren't getting very good propaganda (like diamond says, we have internet and the like now, so it makes the "brainwash your public" idea a bit more difficult) so many are still ill-convinced that a war is necessary.

i was chatting about this situation with my mom last night, she came up with a really good point:

if the u.s can go and pre-emptively strike iraq without concrete evidence of their having wmd's, what stops iraq from striking the us pre-emptively?

 

[TylerDurden]

He did send a missile into Israel and he might be linked to 9/11 he is still alive and thriving. I have no problem with a war on Iraq but it must be substaintated and a reason, a actual reason must be present.

Gees who would have ever thought someone could change someones mind in Free your Mind!!!

You mean the Scuds in the Gulf War? I know, but I meant a WMD, now, out of the blue, what they are afraid of. And there is no hard 100% link between him and 9/11 although I understand that making a link public, if they have one, may not be a good idea.

The point of my post before was, I would support the US if I thought there was a threat. But I can't see the threat, and Im not the only one. It seems only 5 or 6 people from the Bush Administration plus the hardcore Bush supporters in the US support it. But 98% of the other nations of the world don't. A big chunk of America doesn't. Not even all of the American Congress/Senate does. Why? If it was that serious, that it had to be dealt with a large scale war, and soon, and was as deadly a threat as Cheney said the other day, you'd think they all would know it and all would support it.

 

[bonoman]

Thats what i mean tyler, if the US had some hard evidence then the world would be behind them. I also think the US, Bush sont have concrete evidence but do have a preety good idea of whats going on.

Now i pose this question.

If the US has some info on weapons in Iraqand didnt do anything because they didnt have absolute evidence and Iraq bombs the US and kills 1000's and 1000's then do we turn and say why didnt we go after him? Or do we say well we were not sure beyond eveerypersons total satisfaction?

 

[theSoulfulMofo]

abre los ojos.. see the Vanilla sky

Sorry... random title.

This book was writen 40 yrs ago.
Before CableNews.
Before Mass Media.
Before the Internet.

And if u read Hi-Bias post The Bush ppl do not think they r all high and mighty as they r finding out about the American resentment

DB9

Yes the book was written 40 years ago... Jacques Ellul's insight into society wouldn't happen if Aldous Huxley [author of Brave New World] hasn't referred scholars to this obscure French Marxist Catholic layman (most forefront intellectuals are Marxists,e.g. Baudrillard, Jameson)...

Now, to be honest, I haven't completely read Ellul's Propaganda... I'm reading his book Technological Society as a intro into Propaganda.

But given that it was 40 years ago, Ellul's statements couldn't be any more prophetic and real as it is now.

Before cable, mass media, Internet, you say?
Those are the very tools that propagada takes.

 

[Zoomerang96]

the more i read here, and the more i hear out there, the stronger i feel about this issue.

btw, what kind of a democrazy allows someone into office when a different candidate had more votes?

 

[diamond]

Bear-
What type of Democracy, you ask?
The USA is a "Democratic Republic".
Again a display of your polictical obtuseness.:coooco:
Stick w RadioHead..that is our safest bet

Peace
Out-
DB9: :

 

[Zoomerang96]

what are you talking about diamond?

i know what democracy bloody means, you dumbass. quit questioning my intel since you have yet to answer any questions we have presented to you.

but thats ok, you fit the follower role so well, your making dubya proud.

stop acting like a fool and start bringing something worthwhile to the table. if not, then stop coming to the thread and acting like an idiot.

 

[diamond]

what are you talking about diamond?

, you dumbass.

but thats ok, you fit the follower role so well, your making dubya proud.

an idiot.

Bear-
Please stop calling me names
You may want to look up my "Duped By The Right/ Duped By The Left" thread if you wanted to know of my polictical openess.
And plez stop comparing Bush to Hitler.

thank u-
diamond

 

[Lemon Meringue]

btw, what kind of a democrazy allows someone into office when a different candidate had more votes?

Why are you still asking this question after all this time? Wasn't our Electorial College system ever explained to you? Sarcasm perhaps?