Link to original article. (http://truth-out.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=1964:fourteen-propaganda-techniques-fox-news-uses-to-brainwash-americans)

"Not new but still pertinent."

" There is nothing more sacred to the maintenance of democracy than a free press. Access to comprehensive, accurate and quality information is essential to the manifestation of Socratic citizenship - the society characterized by a civically engaged, well-informed and socially invested populace. Thus, to the degree that access to quality information is willfully or unintentionally obstructed, democracy itself is degraded.

It is ironic that in the era of 24-hour cable news networks and "reality" programming, the news-to-fluff ratio and overall veracity of information has declined precipitously. Take the fact Americans now spend on average about 50 hours a week using various forms of media, while at the same time cultural literacy levels hover just above the gutter.

Not only does mainstream media now tolerate gross misrepresentations of fact and history by public figures (highlighted most recently by Sarah Palin's ludicrous depiction of Paul Revere's ride), but many media actually legitimize these displays. Pause for a moment and ask yourself what it means that the world's largest, most profitable and most popular news channel passes off as fact every whim, impulse and outrageously incompetent analysis of its so-called reporters.

How did we get here? Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn't real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn't born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job.

All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?

My curiosity about this question compelled me to sit down and document the most oft-used methods by which willful ignorance has been turned into dogma by Fox News and other propagandists disguised as media.

The techniques I identify here also help to explain the simultaneously powerful identification the Fox media audience has with the network, as well as their ardent, reflexive defenses of it."

rGYK8qyVaRU

This garbage is why most folks dismiss snooty nosed 'elites' with doctorates who haven't a shred of common sense.

:killingme

I don't have the time to tear this apart line by line, I have a real job.

Palin : RE Paul Revere's Ride - was proven correct


Historians agree: Palin was right about Revere (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/06/06/historians-agree-palin-was-right-about-revere/)

One if by land, and two if by sea … and then what? According to historians interviewed by the Boston Herald, Paul Revere then warned the British not to challenge a roused and armed populace. That came as news to many observers who had rushed to criticize Sarah Palin for her response to a gotcha question at the Old North Church:

Sarah Palin yesterday insisted her claim at the Old North Church last week that Paul Revere “warned the British” during his famed 1775 ride — remarks that Democrats and the media roundly ridiculed — is actually historically accurate. And local historians are backing her up.

Palin prompted howls of partisan derision when she said on Boston’s Freedom Trail that Revere “warned the British that they weren’t going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and making sure as he’s riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were going to be secure and we were going to be free.”

The first to dispute Palin’s critics was … Paul Revere himself. In his own account of the ride, written twenty-three years later, Revere recounts how the British captured him, and how he attempted to dissuade the British from advancing. Revere warned that he had roused the local militias and that there would soon be 500 or more armed citizens coming together to repel the British.

A Boston University history professor told the Herald that Revere did indeed warn the British as well as the Americans earlier in his ride:

Boston University history professor Brendan McConville said, “Basically when Paul Revere was stopped by the British, he did say to them, ‘Look, there is a mobilization going on that you’ll be confronting,’ and the British are aware as they’re marching down the countryside, they hear church bells ringing — she was right about that — and warning shots being fired. That’s accurate.”



[although I had to wade through 6 pages of Google Results]


RE: WMD's in Iraq ...... this has already been debunked, but the left cannot let go - they are now showing up in Syria


but from your fav buddy Manning and Wikileeks :


WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq – With Surprising Results (http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2010/10/wikileaks-show-wmd-hunt-continued-in-iraq-with-surprising-results/)

By late 2003, even the Bush White House’s staunchest defenders were starting to give up on the idea that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.

An initial glance at the WikiLeaks war logs doesn’t reveal evidence of some massive WMD program by the Saddam Hussein regime — the Bush administration’s most (in)famous rationale for invading Iraq. But chemical weapons, especially, did not vanish from the Iraqi battlefield. Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained. Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents.

In August 2004, for instance, American forces surreptitiously purchased what they believed to be containers of liquid sulfur mustard, a toxic “blister agent” used as a chemical weapon since World War I. The troops tested the liquid, and “reported two positive results for blister.” The chemical was then “triple-sealed and transported to a secure site” outside their base.

Three months later, in northern Iraq, U.S. scouts went to
look in on a “chemical weapons” complex. “One of the bunkers has been tampered with,” they write. “The integrity of the seal [around the complex] appears intact, but it seems someone is interesting in trying to get into the bunkers.”

Meanwhile, the second battle of Fallujah was raging in Anbar province. In the southeastern corner of the city, American forces came across a “house with a chemical lab … substances found are similar to ones (in lesser quantities located a previous chemical lab.” The following day, there’s a call in another part of the city for explosive experts to dispose of a “chemical cache.”

Nearly three years later, American troops were still finding WMD in the region. An armored Buffalo vehicle unearthed a cache of artillery shells “that was covered by sacks and leaves under an Iraqi Community Watch checkpoint. “The 155mm rounds are filled with an unknown liquid, and several of which are leaking a black tar-like substance.” Initial tests were inconclusive. But later, “the rounds tested positive for mustard.”

How did we get here? Take the enormous amount of misinformation that is taken for truth by Fox audiences: the belief that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and that he was in on 9/11, the belief that climate change isn't real and/or man-made, the belief that Barack Obama is Muslim and wasn't born in the United States, the insistence that all Arabs are Muslim and all Muslims are terrorists, the inexplicable perceptions that immigrants are both too lazy to work and are about to steal your job.

All of these claims are demonstrably false, yet Fox News viewers will maintain their veracity with incredible zeal. Why? Is it simply that we have lost our respect for knowledge?


At least two or three things so utterly absurd about this article makes it clear to me that liberals will find themselves chasing their tails and looking for corners in round rooms.

Aside from the unproven assertion that FOX viewers believe these things - that FOX promotes these ideas - or that people who hold these views must necessarily be FOX viewers - what you have is merely one person's rant about people who disagree with him.

I'm surprised there wasn't some thing about evolution or creationism in there.

You want to know something? I never watched FOX anywhere near as often as I do now - which largely consists of watching Red Eye and The Five in the early hours before I leave for work (yeah, I leave for work THAT early) - until liberals continually brayed about it and complained. THEN my curiosity was piqued. Prior to that, I could give a crap.

On the other hand, some of which he states - I barely know a FOX viewer or conservative who has EVER held that view, nor could name a FOX anchor or pundit who even suggests it is true.

And at least one statement is pointless - the premise that "All Arabs are Muslims". No one believes that, but the supposition is one that is promoted by every news outlet and stereotype you are likely to cross, for one very obvious reason - it is *mostly* true. The diaspora of Arab peoples across the planet are almost entirely Muslim - one estimate I read is as high as 90%. That's not ALL, but it's high enough to legitimize the natural conclusion.

It IS absolutely true that not all Muslims are Arabs, or even mostly so. The largest Muslim nation is Indonesia. The next ones are Pakistan, India and Bangladesh. And nations which belong to the Arab League with large Muslim populations - such as Algeria - are not ethnically Arabs, even though the members of the League speak Arabic.

(One thing I will add - I work with Muslims and have Muslims in my family - and I know they're not all terrorists. But the majority of the major terror attacks against THIS country HAVE been committed by Muslims, and it is idiocy to turn a blind eye to this).

I know not a single soul who believes Saddam Hussein was part of 9/11. Nor have I met one who believes that. I have argued the rationale for the war so often, I'm speaking to a brick wall, because as often as I discuss it with a die-hard liberal, they will still bring it up even after I tell them I emphatically do not see a link. Nor are you going to hear O'Reilly or Hannity or anyone else make that claim.

The immigrant one I have never even heard before. As the writer posited - it is provably false - as in, no one on the network promotes the idea.

The Obama/Muslim thing? I have no idea. As far as I can tell, the President is pretty much not terribly religious at all. A real Muslim does the salah five times a day and performs the other pillars of Islam. He does none of them. You pretty much cannot be a closeted Muslim. And you can bet Muslim leaders across the planet wouldn't be thrilled with his "evolving" towards supporting gay marriage. There's also no evidence he participated as a Muslim as a youth, nor associated with Muslims. But he was immersed in Islam as a young boy.

I know of no one on FOX who claims he's a Muslim. Prove me otherwise.

His birth abroad - the major pundits have openly stated that they believe he was born in the United States - but that they'd also like a little transparency when it comes to his background. Just because you dispute a birth record, Selective Service registration or Social Security number doesn't mean you automatically believe he was foreign-born. Thousands of people have fraudulently produced documents for other reasons - in fact, most of them do.

I left the climate change one for last - because my position on it is that largely the jury is still out on at least five aspects on it.

1. It's not clear to me even if it is occuring and anthropogenic that we can ever do anything about it.
2. Far too many people are claiming some phenomena is caused by global warming to further credibility. When I hear some event being attributed to global warming - and its opposite - I tend to think someone has no damned idea what it is.
3. The more I read about it, the more I am convinced that the forecasts given by the populists far, far outstrip the scientific reality. Every major scientific release and comment by reputable voices on the subject admit that the Chicken Little reactions are far from warranted.
4. It's unclear to me that the proposals to change global warming are even marginally effective. When you curtail your contribution but others are allowed to pollute with impunity, it's pointless. And when nations sign agreements but every last one of them fails to meet the conditions, what is the point?
5. As much as I have read on global warming, at least two more points come out - to be scientific, it must register at least a couple things. One is predictability. A good theory can say "this will happen, given these circumstances". The side positing global warming has almost consistently failed in this regard. The forecasts have been terrible. The other is falsifiability, and this is where I really dig in. A good theory MUST BE ABLE to be proven false. That is, if a theory has a shred of truth, there must be at least one observation or event that, if it happens, proves it false. THIS is where some parts of global warming resembles religion - religious advocates cannot believe their belief is false, therefore all data proving otherwise is immediately suspect. Global warming advocates are like this - they suspect data showing otherwise. A good scientist never does this. In order to have any value, it has to stand up to any reasonable scrutiny. Even Einstein was willing to believe his theories were wrong. That is science. When you can't permit challenges to your ideas, it is not science, it is religion.

As I see it, climate change is occurring. But I don't see what the point is, nor can I be certain that a much larger aspect of it isn't part of a very large climatological and natural occurrence. The world has been warmer and colder, and life has gone on.

Truthout | Fearless, Independent News and Opinion (http://truth-out.org/)

:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme

Nuff said.

I know not a single soul who believes Saddam Hussein was part of 9/11.

Sure you do - I've said (and posted) numerous times that I believe Saddam had a part in 9/11. There were Al Qaeda training camps in northern Iraq and Saddam was funding Islamic Jihad. That was widely reported before it got blacked out like the WMD possession and the convoy to Syria.

And, for final idiot finger-pointing, in 2008 the Pentagon freaking released Iraqi classified documents so anyone who cares to can read it for themselves:

News From USJFCOM: Command releases report (http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/pa032008.html)

It's long and cumbersome, but here are the highlights:
Archived-Articles: Saddam and al-Qaeda (http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/saddam_and_alqaeda_1.html)

Not that anyone will read anything I linked to or even gives a crap. Apparently funding, harboring, and training them doesn't count - it only counts as "support" and "involvement" if Saddam jumped on one of those planes himself and personally slit the throat of a flight attendant.

This crap just pisses me off to no end.

Back from my job and catching up. Gosh Vrai, you sure are on a roll today!

Back from my job and catching up. Gosh Vrai, you sure are on a roll today!

Color me "not afraid to be the lone kook conspiracy theorist who actually pays attention and retains what they see on the news and in declassified documentation".

Sure you do - I've said (and posted) numerous times that I believe Saddam had a part in 9/11. There were Al Qaeda training camps in northern Iraq and Saddam was funding Islamic Jihad. That was widely reported before it got blacked out like the WMD possession and the convoy to Syria.

And, for final idiot finger-pointing, in 2008 the Pentagon freaking released Iraqi classified documents so anyone who cares to can read it for themselves:

News From USJFCOM: Command releases report (http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/pa032008.html)

It's long and cumbersome, but here are the highlights:
Archived-Articles: Saddam and al-Qaeda (http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/04/saddam_and_alqaeda_1.html)

Not that anyone will read anything I linked to or even gives a crap. Apparently funding, harboring, and training them doesn't count - it only counts as "support" and "involvement" if Saddam jumped on one of those planes himself and personally slit the throat of a flight attendant.

This crap just pisses me off to no end.

You're on a roll. Maybe you need a Chick-Fil-A shake or something. Don't kick the dog. Thanks for the link. I will actually read them in my reading room.

You want to know something? I never watched FOX anywhere near as often as I do now - which largely consists of watching Red Eye and The Five in the early hours before I leave for work (yeah, I leave for work THAT early) - until liberals continually brayed about it and complained. THEN my curiosity was piqued. Prior to that, I could give a crap.


Streisand effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect)

Color me "not afraid to be the lone kook conspiracy theorist who actually pays attention and retains what they see on the news and in declassified documentation".



Just waiting for the link where Obama was in on the Kennedy assassination.:gossip:

Just waiting for the link where Obama was in on the Kennedy assassination.:gossip:

Which one?

Just waiting for the link where Obama was in on the Kennedy assassination.:gossip:

Don't know about that but I heard he was riding shotgun with Teddy when he killed that girl.

Don't know about that but I heard he was riding shotgun with Teddy when he killed that girl.

I have the proof of what happened. Of course Barry was a lot younger in this pic...

I have the proof of what happened. Of course Barry was a lot younger in this pic...




Cool, what?


P.S....how was dinner?