Ignorant Propaganda Believers: example 1
Post on another blogspot blog:
USS Neverdock: Reporting on Terrorism, Terrorists, Islam, and biased media
the full text here:
UK - BBC bias tricks Here's another bias trick the BBC use. The headline, in scare quotes, reads thus: US 'must end secret detentions' Notice how the BBC make you think they are quoting someone, presumedly an important person, saying the US "must" end secret detentions. And they also imply that such facilities exist. Now read the story. The US should close any secret "war on terror" detention facilities abroad and the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba, a United Nations report has said. The UN Committee against Torture urged the US to ensure no one was detained in any secret facility. The report followed the first US appearance before the committee since the 11 September 2001 attacks. A legal spokesman for the US state department said the report contained "factual and legal inaccuracies". Which is usually true of BBC reports. The US has been holding hundreds of terror suspects arrested since 11 September at facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and Cuba. It has been accused of operating secret prisons and transporting some detainees to states which use torture. Accused by whom? The BBC does not say of course. Nor does the BBC mention that two EU investigations found no evidence that any such facilities has ever existed. |
Just a thought, in response:
It has been accused by the UN Committee on Torture in their report, the subject of the article.
Spokesmen (Legal or otherwise) for the U.S. State Department are most often given their press briefings from the following State Department Bureaus:
Office of Public Diplomacy
Bureau of International Information Programs (quote from their site: "IIP informs, engages, and influences international audiences about U.S. policy and society to advance America's interests")
Advisory Commision on Public Diplomacy
These bureaus are some (though only a small fraction) of the propaganda dissemination units that are a part of the U.S. government's Executive branch. They provide "information" to the media much the same way as the German government provided "information" to the media in the 1930's and 1940's.
If you read the report that was the subject of the article (which is available here courtesy of the BBC) you will note that they state that the U.S. should close these "war on terror" detention facilities because they are contrary to the U.N. convention on torture, which the U.S. is a party to. As such, the U.S. violation of this convention is, by definition, a War Crime (using the definitions of "War Crimes" set out in precedent at the Nuremburg Tribunal after the second World War).
The idea that "no evidence that any such facilities has ever existed" is assumed when something is referred to as "secret."
Also on the subject, refer to my "Torture" posting, including comments, and my posting regarding the same story (poorly presented due to the annoying limitations of the "copy to clipboard" function, but there in it's entireity nonetheless) that you cover here.
---------
I was not able to publish this as a comment on the originial posting because of "too many links." Therefore, it goes here.
Individuals such as the author of "ussneverdock" are the most basic example of genuinely ignorant and ill-informed individuals who have become completely indoctrinated by official propaganda into adopting a very dangerous mentality, prevalent in U.S. government circles. While (most likely) a person who tries to be moral and upstanding, this person obviously needs to Wake Up To Reality as far as the true nature of their ill-founded beliefs.
Tags:
Propaganda
2 comments:
Just a thought in response,
"It has been accused by the UN Committee on Torture in their report, the subject of the article."
Erm, actually that's not correct. Here's what the committee said in the PDF report linked to by the BBC in para 17.
"17. The Committee is concerned by allegations that the State party has established secret
detention facilities, which are not accessible to the International Committee of the Red Cross."
The committee is not accusing, it says it "is concerned by allegations". That's not an accusing.
"If you read the report that was the subject of the article (which is available here courtesy of the BBC) you will note that they state that the U.S. should close these "war on terror" detention facilities ..."
Yes, you should read the report. In fact search it and you will not find the phrase "war on terror" at all in the report. The BBC report the committee made such a call in the opening paragraph.
"The US should close any secret "war on terror" detention facilities abroad and the Guantanamo Bay camp in Cuba, a United Nations report has said. "
How could the committee call for the closure of facilities it admits it does not know exist?
Noting that the committee says it was "concerned about allegaions" of their existence, here is what they called for:
"The State party should ensure that no one is detained in any secret detention facility
under its de facto effective control."
Not quite what the BBC reported now is it?
"The idea that "no evidence that any such facilities has ever existed" is assumed when something is referred to as "secret."
Two seperate and independent EU investigations found no evidence that such facilities existed. For the BBC to report, falsely, that the committee called for their closure and failed to report the EU investigation results, is proof of the BBC's bias in the matter.
As for the personal attack on me, I've well documented the BBC's bias for over two years now.
http://ussneverdock.blogspot.com/2005/01/bbc-is-turn-off-its-official.html
And here is a website dedicated solely to exposing the BBC.
http://www.biased-bbc.blogspot.com/
Do yourself a favor, open your eyes.
Marc,
Thank you kindly for your response. It goes without saying that the impotus for this post was the fact that I was astounded that it seemed a rational and moral individual could be expressing support for illegal torture and detention policies.
Regardless of wether the words "war on terror" were mentioned in the report, the fact is that the detention facilities exist due strictly to the "war on terror," and as that phrase is accepted policy jargon to refer to the special circumstances the U.S. administration is claiming as their excuse for ignoring the geneva conventions, I don't see why it can't be used in this context.
You assert that secret detention facilities must not exist, because their existence has yet to be proven. I do appreciate your standpoint on the matter, as I agree with the mentality that you can't believe what you hear without it being substantiated with some variety of evidence. I should point out, however, that the EU representatives who were investigating these detention centers were stonewalled by the U.S. defence department on repeated trips and attempts to investigate the claim. Additionally, they were blocked in attempts to find out any details about the payload of CIA-registered planes that were flying from Cuba, through Shannon Airport in Ireland, to parts unknown, then back again. I'd say that if those who want to keep something secret are the only ones with access to the information, then it's gonna stay a secret regardless of how many outsiders attempt to investigate. The bit regarding this that you left out of your selective editing of the report I need to "open my eyes" to is as follows:
The Committee considers the “no
comment” policy of the State party regarding the existence of such secret detention facilities, as well
as on its intelligence activities, to be regrettable.
I hope I didn't come across as making a personal attack on you, other than saying you were ill-informed and that you believed the U.S. Department of State propaganda before you believed the BBC, which I find to be slightly regrettable myself.
Personally, I don't like the BBC all that much either, but in fairness they are much less biased than the American media. If you want to have some real fun pointing out bias and inaccurate reporting, you should try tuning in to Fox News from the U.S. sometime. It's so far out there you can only laugh.
Again, thank you for your comment on my blog, all reactions are appreciated.
-Misneach
Post a Comment