Agenda Prevails Over Truth
In the Western world truth no longer has any meaning. In its place stands agenda.
Agenda is all important, because it is the way Washington achieves
hegemony over the world and the American people. 9/11 was the “new Pearl
Harbor” that the neoconservatives declared to be necessary for their
planned wars against Muslim countries. For the neoconservatives to go
forward with their agenda, it was necessary for Americans to be
connected to the agenda.
President George W. Bush’s first Treasury Secretary, Paul O’Neil,
said that prior to 9/11 the first cabinet meeting was about the need to
invade Iraq.
9/11 was initially blamed on Afghanistan, and the blame was later
shifted to Iraq. Washington’s mobilization against Afghanistan was in
place prior to 9/11. The George W. Bush regime’s invasion of Afghanistan
(Operation Enduring Freedom) occurred on October 7, 2001, less than a
month after 9/11. Every military person knows that it is not possible to
have mobilization for invading a country half way around the world
ready in three weeks.
The Orwellian “PATRIOT Act” is another example of planning prior to
the event. This vast police state measure could not possibly have been
written in the short time between 9/11 and its introduction in Congress.
The bill was already written, sitting on the shelf waiting its
opportunity. Why? Who wrote it? Why has there been no media
investigation of the advanced preparation of this police state
legislation?
Evidence that responses to an event were planned prior to what the
government said was a surprise event does suggest that the event was
engineered to drive an agenda that was already on the books.
Many on the left-wing are immune to evidence that is contrary to the
official 9/11 story, because for them 9/11 is refreshing blow-back from
the oppressed. That the oppressed struck back is more important to the
left-wing than the facts.
The right-wing can’t let go of the fantasy either. America in all its
purity and wonderfulness was attacked because evil Muslims cannot stand
our goodness. “They hate us for our freedom and democracy.” The
right-wing vision of a great and good America wronged is essential to
the right-wing’s sustaining ideology, an ideology that is prepared to
commit violence in order to prove its righteousness.
Implausible stories can be useful to other agendas and thus be
sustained by their use in other arguments. For example, the Obama
regime’s story of the killing of Osama bin Laden is central to Charles
Pierson’s story in the November 16-30, 2012, CounterPunch in which
Pierson writes about the growing strains on the US-Pakistan alliance.
Pierson writes that bin Laden resided next to Pakistan’s largest
military academy and that bin Laden “did go next door every Wednesday to
use the pool. If the Pakistani government was unaware of bin Laden’s
presence this would mark an intelligence failure of heroic proportions.”
Is it plausible that Osama bin Laden, a hunted man (actually a man
dead for a decade), visited the Pakistani army, a bought-and-paid-for
entity used by Washington to launch attacks on Pakistan’s
semi-autonomous tribal areas, to go swimming every Wednesday?
Or is this a fairy tale made possible by ignoring the live interviews
of the neighbors of the alleged “bin Laden compound.” According to
Pakistanis who knew the person living in “bin Laden’s compound,” the
person Americans were told was bin Laden was a long-time friend who
imported foreign delicacies. An eye witness to the “assault” on “bin
Laden’s compound” reported that when the helicopter lifted off it
exploded and there were no survivors. If there were no survivors, there
was no sea burial of bin Laden. http://www.globalresearch.ca/pakistan-tv-report-contradicts-us-claim-of-bin-laden-s-death/25915
How is it that the US media can produce a story as fact that is
contradicted by the news on the ground? Is the answer that the bin
Laden assassination story served an agenda by providing evidence that we
were winning?
Consider the Sandy Hook school shooting. This shooting serves as an
excuse for “progressives” to express their hatred of guns and the NRA
and to advance their gun control agenda. Few if any of those
hyperventilating over the tragedy know any of the parents of the
murdered children. They have shown no similar response to the US
government’s murder of countless thousands of Muslim children. The
Clinton regime alone killed 500,000 Iraqi children with illegal
sanctions, and Clinton’s immoral secretary of state, a feminist hero,
said that she thought the sanctions were worth the cost of one half
million dead Iraqi children.
Suddenly, 20 US children become of massive importance to
“progressives.” Why? Because the deaths foster their agenda–gun
control in the US.
When I hear people talk about “gun violence,” I wonder what has
happened to language. A gun is an inanimate object. An inanimate object
cannot cause violence. Humans cause violence. The relevant question
is: why do humans cause violence? This obvious question seldom gets
asked. Instead, inanimate objects are blamed for the actions of humans.
In one of its reports on the Sandy Hook shooting, Time noted that
such events “inevitably reopen debates about gun control, or more
tenuously lead people to complain about American culture itself. Yet on
the very same day, a 36-year-old Chinese man attacked 22 children with a
knife at a primary school in China, suggesting that there is a critical
factor with mass homicides that gets far less attention.” That factor,
“the core of these events,” is mental health and “our failure to
address it as a society.” http://ideas.time.com/2012/12/15/sandy-hook-shooting-why-did-lanza-target-a-school/?iid=obnetwork
That factor remains unaddressed, because the agenda-driven media is
determined to use the Sandy Hook shootings as a means of achieving gun
control. One wonders if there is a “knife control” agenda in China. What
follows is not an argument that the report of the Sandy Hook shootings
is a hoax. What follows is an argument that suspicions are created when
agenda takes precedence over reporting and discrepancies in reports are
left unresolved.
Agenda-driven news is the reason that apparent inconsistencies in the
Sandy Hook story were not investigated or explained. According to
some reports, the medical examiner said the children were shot with a
rifle, but other reports say the accused was found dead inside the
school with two pistols and that a rifle was found outside in the car.
The police capture a man in the woods who says “I didn’t do it.” How
would a person in the woods know what has just happened? Who was the
man? Was he investigated and released? Will we ever know? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovspEgeMXb4
Some reports say the school was locked and admission is via security
camera and being buzzed in. Why would a heavily armed person be buzzed
in? Other reports say he shot his way in. Why wouldn’t such a
commotion have alerted the school?
Another puzzle is the video of a father whose child has supposedly
been shot to pieces. Prior to the interview he is caught on camera
laughing and joking, and then, like an actor, he pulls his face and
voice into a presentation of grief for the interview. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urrRcgB581w and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMINqFGNr-w
The spokesman for the Connecticut State Police is anxious to control
the story, warns social media against posting information contrary to
official information, but provides little information, refusing to
answer most questions. The usual “ongoing investigation” is invoked, but
Lanza has already been declared to be the killer and the number of dead
reported. About the only hard information that emerges is that the
police are investigating where every component of the weapons was
manufactured. The relevance to the shooting of where the components of
the weapons were manufactured is not explained. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/people-spreading-misinformation-sandy-hook-massacre-face-charges-police-article-1.1221554
The medical examiner’s press conference is weird. He is incoherent,
unsure of what he is supposed to say, hasn’t answers to questions he
should have, and defers to police.
Perhaps the best way to avoid fueling suspicion is for public
officials not to hold press conferences until they are prepared to
answer the relevant questions.
And where are the bodies? Like the alleged murder of Osama bin Laden
by a SEAL, the crucial evidence is not provided. Paul Vance, the
Connecticut State Police spokesman, said that the “victims’ bodies were
removed from the school overnight” and that detectives “were able to
positively identify all of the victims and make some formal notification
to all of the families of the victims.” http://www.kens5.com/news/Sandy-Hook-victims-identified-bodies-removed-from-school-overnight-183647091.html?ref=next
Allegedly, no parent wanted to see the body of their dead child, but
how do you know it is your child if you do not see the body? It is a
strange kind of closure when it is provided to parents by impersonal
detectives. Has anyone seen a body other than a state medical examiner
and a few detectives? Where are the media’s films of body bags being
carried out of the school? Why would Obama’s gun control agenda forego
the propaganda of a procession of body bags being carried out of a
school?
Perhaps the sensitivity issue prevailed, but with all the suspicion
that already exists about the government and its claims, why fuel the
suspicion by withholding visual evidence of the tragedy?
There are reports that when emergency medical help arrived at the
school, the medical personnel were denied access to the children on the
grounds that there were no survivors and the scene was too gruesome.
Yet, there is a conflicting story that one six-year old girl had the
presence of mind to play dead and walked out of her classroom unscathed.
If the story is true, how do we know that other survivors did not bleed
to death from wounds because the emergency medical personnel were
denied access? Did police exercise more control over the scene than was
warranted? http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/121216/sandy-hook-shooting-girl-6-was-sole-survivor-her
It doesn’t seem to matter that questions are not answered and discrepancies are not resolved. http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-sandy-hook-school-massacre-unanswered-questions-and-missing-information/5316776
The story is useful to the gun control agenda. Progressives, in
order to achieve their agenda, are willing adjuncts of the police state.
The facts of the shooting are less important than the use of the
incident to achieve their agenda.
Probably there are answers to the questions. Moreover, the news
reports that are the basis for questions could be incorrect. But why
aren’t the answers provided and confusions cleared up? Instead, people
who ask obvious questions are dismissed as “insensitive to the tragedy”
or as “conspiracy kooks.” This in itself deepens suspicion.
The Colorado movie theater shooting has its own unresolved
discrepancies. One eyewitness claimed that there were two shooters.
Apparently, the suspect was captured sitting in a car in the theater
parking lot, which seems strange. There are claims that the accused, a
graduate student in neuroscience, was involved with the Defense Advance
Research Projects Agency in mind control research and that he doesn’t
remember doing the shooting.
Do we actually know? Apparently not. Wouldn’t it be preferable to
investigate these claims rather than to leave them as unanswered sources
of suspicion? The loose ends of the Colorado movie shooting contribute
to the suspicions caused by news reports of the Sandy Hook shootings.
A shooting incident occurs. The government puts out a story. Agendas
form and take the place of the story. Unresolved issues disappear in
heated dispute over agendas. Gun control advocates blame guns, and
Second Amendment defenders blame other factors.
When the media permit agenda to take precedence over news, people
lose confidence in the media and distrust spreads deeper into society.
If the media and the government are opposed to conspiracy theories, they
should not foster the theories by mishandling the news.
Neither the right-wing nor the left-wing has an interest in getting
to the bottom of things. The right-wing is aligned with the police state
in order to make us safe from “terrorism”– Muslim terrorism, not the
terrorism of the unaccountable police state.
The American left is so feeble that it essentially doesn’t exist. Its
issues are gun control, homosexual marriage, abortion, and taxing “the
rich.” Such misfocus cannot slow the onrushing militarized police state.
American liberals have such an abiding faith in government that they
are incapable of believing that beloved government would be culpable in
crimes–unless, of course, it was Ronald Reagan’s government.
As tyranny envelops the land, the main goal of the left-wing is to disarm the population.
The American left is the enabler of the police state, and the American right is its progenitor.
Americans began their descent into deception and tyranny in the final
years of the 20th century with the Clinton regime’s aggression against
Serbia and murderous sanctions on Iraq. These war crimes were portrayed
by the US media and foreign policy community as great achievements of
Western democracy and humanitarianism.
In the first decade of the 21st century Americans lost their
constitutional protections and had their pocketbooks opened to
indefinite wars. The latest report is that Washington is sending US
troops into 35 African countries. http://rt.com/usa/news/us-deploying-troops-order-749/print/
No comments:
Post a Comment