Chemtrail Central
Login
Member List
Image Database
Chemtrail Forum
Active Topics
Who's Online
Search
Research
Flight Explorer
Unidentifiable
FAQs
Phenomena
Disinformation
Silver Orbs
Transcripts
News Archive
Channelings
Etcetera
PSAs
Media
Vote


Chemtrail Central
Search   FAQs   Messages   Members   Profile
Newspeak turns fight against terrorists into endless war

Post new topic Reply to topic
Chemtrail Central > Wars

Author Thread
Ellyn





Joined: 16 Jul 2000
Posts: 5357
Newspeak turns fight against terrorists into endless war PostFri Jun 22, 2007 10:38 pm  Reply with quote  

http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2007/jun/22/newspeak-turns-fight-against-terrorists-into-war/

Newspeak turns fight against terrorists into endless war

By Ernest A. Canning
Ventura County Star, Opinion section
Friday, June 22, 2007

In George Orwell's "1984," the English language was reconstructed into Newspeak "not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits of (the Party), but to make other modes of thought impossible."

America put Orwellian terminology to use even before "1984" was committed to print. With every war comes war profiteering. After World War II, the trick was to find a way to justify continued military spending in the face of every war profiteer's nightmare peace. They replaced the War Department with the Department of Defense. No matter how many countries we have invaded over the past 60 years, an ever-expanding percentage of the federal budget is devoted to "military preparedness" in order to "maintain peace."

Perhaps the most salient example of Orwellian Newspeak entails the phrase "war on terror." Despite the fact that the concept of "war" is ordinarily reserved to armed conflicts between nation states, on Sept. 12, 2001, President Bush informed the nation that 9/11 was not merely an act of terrorism, but an act of "war." This was followed by a Sept. 27, 2001, Don Rumsfeld commentary in The New York Times that asserted this would be a "war" like no other and we should not even begin to think of an "exit strategy."

While a nation whose psyche was badly damaged with each successive, televised replay of the collapse of the twin towers blindly accepted this initial assertion, its validity was questioned by an unlikely source. The confirmation hearings of Justice Samuel Alito, author of the radically subversive "Unitary Executive" theory, produced the following colloquy:

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R.S.C.: "Do you believe the attacks on 9/11 against our nation were a crime or an act of war?"

Judge Alito: "That's a hard question to answer"

Graham cut him off: "Do you doubt that our nation has been in an armed conflict with a terrorist organization since 9/11, that we have been in an undeclared state of war?"

Judge Alito: "In a lay sense, certainly we have been in a conflict with a terrorist organization. I am just concerned that, in the law, all these phrases can have particular meaning."

As a practical matter, the phrase "war on terror" borders upon a meaningless oxymoron. As noted by retired Gen. William Odom, former head of the National Security Agency: "Terrorism is not an enemy. It cannot be defeated. It's a tactic. It's about as sensible to say we declare war on night attacks and expect we're going to win that war."

As a propaganda device, "war on terror" provides an especially powerful piece of Orwellian Newspeak. In "The Bush Agenda," Antonia Juhasz notes the phrase envisions a perpetual war with a "phantom menace" involving "shadowy networks of individuals": a threat that must be met "anywhere at any time, or everywhere all the time."

For more than five years, most Americans, including the so-called "leaders" of the Democratic opposition, have shown themselves incapable of questioning this basic premise. The idea that 9/11 was merely a crime an especially heinous crime, but a crime nonetheless has simply not entered their thought processes. Because "war" impacts the scope of executive power, an endless "war on terror" has served as a cover for massive military expenditures and an attempted permanent restructuring of our federal government so as to eliminate checks and balances in favor of dictatorial executive powers.

Long before 9/11, a neoconservative cabal the Project for the New American Century decided to force regime change in Iraq so as to secure a permanent American hegemony in the oil-rich Middle East. By fixing the facts and intelligence around the policy, the neoconservatives convinced America the Iraq invasion was a necessary component of the "war on terror," falsely linking Saddam Hussein to al-Qaida and 9/11.

They have kept Iraq within the "war on terror" frame by labeling any Iraqi who dared to take up arms to resist this illegal occupation as a "terrorist." And, in an ultimate twist, these Orwellian sociopaths have enhanced their ability to keep in harm's way the American soldiers their lies betrayed through another Orwellian phrase, "Support the troops."

Ernest A. Canning lives in Thousand Oaks.
 View user's profile Send private message
shatoga





Joined: 23 Nov 2002
Posts: 1297
PostSat Jun 23, 2007 10:02 pm  Reply with quote  

Orwell was a Brit conservative
his novel revealed what he learned about conservatives' plans to dominate the world with a one party rule police state

Plans that came to fruition with Falwellian reality

Language: A Key Mechanism of Control
Newt Gingrich's 1996 GOPAC memo
As you know, one of the key points in the GOPAC tapes is that "language matters." In the video "We are a Majority," Language is listed as a key mechanism of control used by a majority party, along with Agenda, Rules, Attitude and Learning. As the tapes have been used in training sessions across the country and mailed to candidates we have heard a plaintive plea: "I wish I could speak like Newt."

That takes years of practice. But, we believe that you could have a significant impact on your campaign and the way you communicate if we help a little. That is why we have created this list of words and phrases.

This list is prepared so that you might have a directory of words to use in writing literature and mail, in preparing speeches, and in producing electronic media. The words and phrases are powerful. Read them. Memorize as many as possible. And remember that like any tool, these words will not help if they are not used.

While the list could be the size of the latest "College Edition" dictionary, we have attempted to keep it small enough to be readily useful yet large enough to be broadly functional. The list is divided into two sections: Optimistic Positive Governing words and phrases to help describe your vision for the future of your community (your message) and Contrasting words to help you clearly define the policies and record of your opponent and the Democratic party.

Please let us know if you have any other suggestions or additions. We would also like to know how you use the list. Call us at GOPAC or write with your suggestions and comments. We may include them in the next tape mailing so that others can benefit from your knowledge and experience.


Optimistic Positive Governing Words
Use the list below to help define your campaign and your vision of public service. These words can help give extra power to your message. In addition, these words help develop the positive side of the contrast you should create with your opponent, giving your community something to vote for!

active(ly)
activist
building
candid(ly)
care(ing)
challenge
change
children
choice/choose
citizen
commitment
common sense
compete
confident
conflict
control
courage
crusade
debate
dream
duty
eliminate good-time in prison
empower(ment)
fair
family
freedom
hard work
help
humane
incentive
initiative
lead learn
legacy
liberty
light
listen
mobilize
moral
movement
opportunity
passionate
peace
pioneer
precious
premise
preserve
principle(d)
pristine
pro- (issue): flag, children, environment, reform
prosperity
protect
proud/pride
provide
reform
rights
share
strength
success
tough
truth
unique
vision
we/us/our
Contrasting Words
Often we search hard for words to define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.

abuse of power
anti- (issue): flag, family, child, jobs
betray
bizarre
bosses
bureaucracy
cheat
coercion
"compassion" is not enough
collapse(ing)
consequences
corrupt
corruption
criminal rights
crisis
cynicism
decay
deeper
destroy
destructive
devour
disgrace
endanger
excuses
failure (fail)
greed
hypocrisy
ideological
impose
incompetent
insecure
insensitive intolerant
liberal
lie
limit(s)
machine
mandate(s)
obsolete
pathetic
patronage
permissive attitude
pessimistic
punish (poor ...)
radical
red tape
self-serving
selfish
sensationalists
shallow
shame
sick
spend(ing)
stagnation
status quo
steal
taxes
they/them
threaten
traitors
unionized
urgent (cy)
waste
welfare





____________________________________________________________________________
http://web.utk.edu/~glenn/GopacMemo.html
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4443.htm
 View user's profile Send private message

Post new topic Reply to topic
Forum Jump:
Jump to:  

All times are GMT.
The time now is Fri Feb 23, 2018 2:42 am


  Display posts from previous:      




© 21st Century Thermonuclear Productions
All Rights Reserved, All Wrongs Revenged, Novus Ordo Seclorum, All Your Base