12 posts tagged “propaganda”

"Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all..." Michael Rivero.

While cruising YouTube today I came across a video which caught my attention and it is on YouTube under possibly two different users.  The videos are:

ATROCITIES,TESTIMONY OF A FORMER US ARMY RANGER IN IRAQ

TESTIMONY OF A FORMER US ARMY RANGER Part-1/2

Very damning stuff about US soldiers in Iraq.  But his whole story is a lie. In fact he has recently been released from prison because as well as his lies, he also tried to claim false Veterans Affairs benefits.  Jesse has apologised for his actions and now realises how serious his allegations were and the potentially dangerous consequences of his actions to others, including those currently serving in the armed forces.

How did I discover that his story is a lie?  Well it took quite a bit of investigation, but I eventually uncovered the truth - I Googled his name, yes it was that simple.   I did have an advantage though  which others before me didn't have, when Jesse first came out with his allegations there wasn't any concrete evidence to the contrary.

This sort of action does not help anyone.  Jesse has and is paying for what he did and I am sure he will be paying for it for quite some time yet.

Lakewood man wishes he could take back lies

What makes me angry at the moment is that there at two YouTube users who know that Jesse's story is fake and they are still airing it at YouTube and genuine caring people who are against the war are being sucked in.  I tried leaving comments but they were blocked, so I have reported them and I hope others do the same and these videos get banned.  There is another YouTube user who is trying to make people aware that Jesse's story is fake.

I am sure there are many soldiers with tragic stories to be told, but this is not one of them.

Until late last night I hadn’t posted anything here for 7 days that has to be some sort of a record for me.  There was a good reason for my absence I was in the process of converting from a liberal to a conservative.  I will take you through this conversion and the rational behind my conversion.

For a long time now I have been accused of being a liberal but I was in a state of denial.  I mistakenly interpreted all of the hateful names being thrown at me by my fellow conservatives as insults, when in fact what they were trying to do was actually save me from myself.  I came across this quote by Winston Churchill:

“Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has not heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains.”

Although this quote does refer to a man, I figured that it probably applies to women in this day and age as well.  Given I am now 41 years of age I decided that I should see if in fact I was a liberal or a conservative.  I searched the internet and came across two reliable tests and I did them.  The results showed that I was in fact on the whole a liberal.  Oh dear that means that according to Churchill I have no brains.  However there was still some hope for me, as according to one test I wasn’t 100% a liberal, just 80% a liberal.  The break down being as such:

Overall: 20% Conservative, 80% Liberal

Personal Responsibility: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal

Fiscal Issues: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal

Ethics: 0% Conservative, 100% Liberal

Defense and Crime: 25% Conservative, 75% Liberal

The second test also indicated that I was a liberal.  The shameful interpretation of my results can be seen at the end of this post.  I feel so embarrassed at having to display my results and inclination so publicly, but as part of my therapy I needed to admit my wrong way of thinking and show it to the world so as to maybe save some other misguided people.

Well the results were in; I was in fact a liberal.  So my conservative buddies as they had been trying to inform me for ages were in fact as always Right!  I know I should have listened to them, but it is not easy facing up to the truth.

So where to from here? Some how I had to leap over the huge liberal - conservative divide and land safely on the conservative side.  I had been told there is no in between, just an endless cavern of nothingness between the two sides. Well 41 years of liberal indoctrination was not going to be easy to reverse, so there was only one choice I needed intense rehabilitation and that is why I have been off the air for a week – I have been in liberal rehab.

Now that it was known that I was definitely a liberal, I was now a huge security risk to many nations. As Ronald Reagan said regarding those protesting against the Vietnam War, "Some American will die tonight because of the activity in our streets."  So now because I was against the Iraq War, I was a threat to the soldiers in Iraq, so I caught the next available “Extraordinary Rendition” flight out of the country to a mystery destination.  Once I arrived I was lead into “Room 101” where my rehabilitation would begin.

Because tests showed that I did have 20% conservative thoughts it was hoped that my rehabilitation would not be too prolonged and my liberal indoctrination would be reversed.

Before therapy I did ask one question, “Would becoming a conservative mean I would have to stop recognising ANZAC Day which is a day that I as an Australian see as one of the most patriotic days for an Australian, a day where Australians commemorate fallen soldiers and victims of war, a day of great respect and never a day for glorifying war?”.  Luckily I was able to be a conservative and still commemorate this day.

The first thing that needed to be done would be to have my personality deconstructed and reformed just had been done to Jose Padilla.  The chosen form of mind deconstruction would be intense isolation and a form of therapy called “Waterboarding”, which is a very safe technique that has no resemblance to any form of torture despite what some critics say. 

My mind had now been deconstructed; it was now time to reform my mind into one of a conservative. 

I was instructed that the US is losing in Iraq because liberals and their associates such as Looney Lefties, Pinko Commies, and stupid Socialists have not decided they want or need to win and they are yellow bellied cowards.

I had memorised my mantra, “Defeat liberals use logic and reason.”

I had read the article, “Why liberals make atrocious parents” and from that article I learnt the following: I learnt that liberals today have no self-control, no purity, no sense of moderation, and they lack restraint.

I learnt that it is a parent's job to teach a child how to think, the framework of what to believe, and to equip them for the future. I was amazed as I don’t think I knew this before, but I have little memory of what I thought before my mind was deconstructed, but given I was a liberal there is no way I could have known this.

I learnt how to be a good conservative parent by teaching children discipline so that their behaviour does not bring harm to themselves, and in public they do not harass or bring harm to others. I also learnt something that grieved me deeply; I should say "NO" when a child reaches for a hot pot on a stove.  I now know why my son has scars on part of his body from burns, it was because I was a stupid liberal and I didn’t know that I needed to say NO when he pulled the pot from the stove. I have been such a bad mother, but now that I am a conservative that will all change.

Next process on reconstruction of my brain was to read some of Anne Coulter’s books on liberals.

“How to talk to a liberal (If you must).”  This book was great it taught me that liberals firmly believe that there is one set of rules for them, and another, completely different set of rules for everyone else.  No way do I want to talk to a liberal now.

“Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right”.  A fantastic book that shows that liberals have been wrong about everything in the last half century.  Now I know why the conservatives are right wingers, it is because they are always right.  Why didn’t I make the connection before? Damn I really was a liberal stuck on stupid.

The next step was to buy a gun.  Not an easy task in Australia I must admit, but I needed one so it seemed, as according to conservatives: We let our guns do the talking!  You can’t reason with evil and now that I am a conservative I needed a gun to do my talking.  I was then told that Liberals use their mouth.  Conservatives use their brain right I now use my brain to think and then I talk with my gun – got it!  This conservative stuff was easy to learn.  There is only good and evil and right and wrong, so there are no grey areas to worry about, which is great as it now means I have to use less brain power.

Also it seems now that I am a conservative, I can use quite considerably less brain power because we should follow our current leaders without question, because to question our leaders would be unpatriotic and it means we hate our country.  It is okay to dissent, but it is not okay to hate our country which is what liberals do, they hate their country when they dissent.  Whereas when conservatives dissent we don’t hate our country.  I was a bit confused by this, because what did we have to dissent about if we were okay with what our leaders did?  I was told, “Nothing, but just in case the other side gets in at a future election then that gives us the opportunity to dissent and not seem like hypocrites, but we won’t be hateful when we do dissent, because Hate is not a family value”.  I was then told, “There is an exception to this rule though and that is when we are interacting with liberals and their kind and they are really annoying us out in the world and if we have a conversation with one, even if that one hasn’t done anything to us, it is okay to throw in a few verbal insults and some nasty name calling because they deserve it!”

Now it was time to talk about the Iraq War.  We were there to install democracy and destroy Islamofascist terrorists. I asked how long this would take and was told that there was no definite time frame, but the whole process could take decades and many innocent people would be killed along the way.  I must admit the thought of it taking decades was rather horrifying and time consuming.  I queried, “But won’t there be more terrorists to take their place every time we kill them?” 

I was told, “Yes but we will keep killing until they are all gone and the world is safe again.”

Given I was now an enthusiastic convert and I guess a bit over zealous as a new convert quite often is, I suggested an alternative to it taking decades.  “Why don’t we just short cut the whole process and bomb them all back to the Stone Age and get it over and done with so that we can move on?  Sure there would be many innocent people killed, but by sounds of it we are going to kill many innocent people along the way anyway, so let’s just do it!”  My idea didn’t go down to well, I forgot that we were there to install democracy and also that much bombing may cause way too much damage to the oil fields in the area and destroy a vital natural resource.

The final bit of advice I was given before re-entering society as a conservative was:

“We must always Honor our troops …….. Honor their sacrifice! We enjoy our liberty as a result of the men and women who valued liberty and opportunity and were willing to offer themselves to protect these ideals. . .”

This last piece of advice sparked a memory from my former liberal mind and I replied, “Just like I did every ANZAC Day when I was a liberal?”  To which my therapist said, “Yes that’s right just like you did when you were a Damn LeftIE

*** Just in case this post is lost on anyone and I have offended someone, which isn’t difficult for me to do at times. 

Everything I have said has been seen either in print, on the net or on people’s blogs. 

There is certainly some satire and sarcasm in this piece in regards to certain points especially in regards to what I see as human rights abuses and I make no apologies for that.

I will also add that some liberals and their kind can be just as hateful as some conservatives; yes there are plenty of bumper stickers out there beating down the conservatives.

The main point is stop making sweeping generalisations based on what political persuasion you believe some one to be, base your opinions on their actions and words.  I am talking about  everyone across the spectrum, this is not a target against conservatives.  It points out some of the absurd assumptions made by people about the 'other' side. Also I am NOT having a go at anyone person. The point about conservatives needing less brain power - was a demonstration of an example of a generalised assumption from the liberal side, not my belief.  Just the same as that ridiculous article about liberals and their parenting skills.

When it comes to freedom of speech both sides can be just as guilty in trying to shut the other side up. 

Both sides get it correct sometimes despite what you may think.  Also there are grey areas. 

Plus as far as propaganda is concerned, every political group is guilty of producing it.  Sifting through the lies is a nightmare at times. 

It would be nice if our leaders would tell us the truth and people would stop spreading lies to further their cause.

I will also say one more thing; you can’t accuse some one of hate and in the same paragraph call them at least four insulting names when they haven’t even made one comment to you and they haven't even said anything hateful.

Interpretation of second test.

Liberal

Based on your answers to the questionnaire, you most closely resemble survey respondents within the Liberal typology group. This does not mean that you necessarily fit every group characteristic or agree with the group on all issues.

Liberals represent 17 percent of the American public, and 19 percent of registered voters.

Basic Description
This group has nearly doubled in proportion since 1999, Liberals now comprise the largest share of Democrats and is the single largest of the nine Typology groups. They are the most opposed to an assertive foreign policy, the most secular, and take the most liberal views on social issues such as homosexuality, abortion, and censorship. They differ from other Democratic groups in that they are strongly pro-environment and pro-immigration, issues which are more controversial among Conservative and Disadvantaged Democrats.

Defining Values
Strongest preference for diplomacy over use of military force. Pro-choice, supportive of gay marriage and strongly favor environmental protection. Low participation in religious activities. Most sympathetic of any group to immigrants as well as labor unions, and most opposed to the anti-terrorism Patriot Act.

Who They Are
Most (62%) identify themselves as liberal. Predominantly white (83%), most highly educated group (49% have a college degree or more), and youngest group after Bystanders. Least religious group in typology: 43% report they seldom or never attend religious services; nearly a quarter (22%) are seculars. More than one-third never married (36%). Largest group residing in urban areas (42%) and in the western half the country (34%). Wealthiest Democratic group (41% earn at least $75,000).

Lifestyle Notes
Largest group to have been born (or whose parents were born) outside of the U.S. or Canada (20%). Least likely to report having a gun at home (23%) or attending bible study or prayer group meetings (13%).

2004 Election
Bush 2%, Kerry 81%

Party ID
59% Democrat; 40% Independent/No Preference, 1% Republican (92% Dem/Lean Dem)

Media Use
Liberals are second only to Enterprisers in following news about government and public affairs most of the time (60%). Liberals’ use of the internet to get news is the highest among all groups (37%).

I came across this quote today in the comments section of a YouTube video. 

"1935 will go down in History! For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient and the world will follow our lead to the future!" - Adolf Hitler

To be honest the person was actually supporting the view of the video in question and I also support the view of the video in question, but I have learnt that if a quote sounds too good to be true or it just seems to fit into a certain argument just too nicely, then it needs to be questioned.

As suspected the quote is most likely false as there is no evidence that it was ever said by Adolf Hitler.  It is a quote that the pro-gun lobby seems to like to use.  I am not pro-gun lobby, the person using the quote this time was using it to make another point.  I have informed the person involved.

More information can be found about the false quote at this link: Bogus Gun Control Quotes

There is a lot of false propaganda circulating the net these days, the following sites do good work in identifying some of the false propaganda doing the rounds.

Snopes

Urban Legends

HOAXBUSTER

I think that when we are writing our posts we need to be careful that we are not spreading false information and we need to try and check our sources as best we can.  It is not always easy I know.

Words of wisdom from the 8 Armed Freak about George Bush, The CIA, America, Democracy, the war in Iraq and what his mam has made for his tea.

He's like Michael Parenti & Noam Chomsky all rolled into one, except with more arms.

Don't forget to watch the CIA rolling credits at the end - We must give credit where credit is due!

For the past week I have been working with another Voxer in putting together a song about speaking out and questioning our leaders.  The song is based on Pink Floyd's (Roger Waters) song The Wall Part 2.   Our version is just a different take on a great song which I found inspirational and our version should be seen as a compliment to Pink Floyd's inspiring original work.   Nothing can surpass the original version. Thanks to Pink Floyd for the original music and lyrics.

Thanks to VOX for giving two people from opposite sides of the world the opportunity to work on something as one.

A big thank you to Dave for making my lyrics come alive.   Great team effort  :)

Anyway this is just our way of saying speak out and ask questions - we have a right to know the truth.

To listen to our version of the great Pink Floyd song, click on this link.

The link to the song: Another Dig @ The Wall

Lyrics:

We don’t need your continual deception

We don’t need your thought control

No dark forecasts to invade our psyche

Leaders leave our rights alone

Hey! Leaders! Stop thinking we’re your drones!

All in all you're just another brick in the wall.

All they think is we’re just another brick in their wall.

We don't need your continual Newspeak

We don’t want your thought control

No stark deception in the mainstream

Leaders leave your lies at home.

Hey! Leaders! We will not be clones!

We must not be just another brick in the wall.

We will not be just another brick in their wall.

-------

Trivia Question

Q: How man times can President George W Bush mention the name Al Qaeda in reference to Al Qaeda in Iraq, in one speech?

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

A:  95 times.
 

Intelligence officials and counterterrorism experts also called Bush's speech "misleading." Throughout the speech the president referred to Al Qaeda 95 times, but of those he only referenced Al Qaeda in Iraq 29 times.  (Source)

.

.

So the question is: Is criticism of Israel Anti - Semitic?

In my opinion: NO!

The real question should be: "Why shouldn't they be criticised?"

They have an atrocious human rights record; they are an illegal occupier and oppressor.  They see themselves as the chosen people and as they see it, are above international law.  They use undue military force against Palestinian civilians when Israelis continually invade and occupy clearly stated Palestinian borders.  They also repeatedly and illegally take land away from Palestinians.  Then they have the audacity to cry innocent to the world when a Palestinian fights back.

Sorry Israel it is time that you stopped playing the anti-Semitic card and face up to your own actions. It is time to stop using the 20^th Century Holocaust perpetrated on the Jewish people as a guilt trip on the world.  What happened to the Jewish people in Europe and the Soviet Union was an appalling crime against the Jewish people, and it should never have occurred.  But there is evidence that Zionists did not do much to help their fellow Jewish brothers and sisters and if I maybe so bold, most likely saw it as a plus, as the Zionist movement has used the Holocaust as a gag to stop world out cry in protests against the genocide (UN definition) that Israel has perpetrated on the Palestinian people.  The Zionists have used the Holocaust as a lever to get the State of Israel to be one of the richest countries and one of the most powerful military forces on this planet.  They have used the guilt to be one of the biggest, if not the biggest lobbyers of the US Government. 

In my opinion criticising Israel is a just thing to do, and if it requires a name with “anti” attached to it, then anti – Zionism would be a much better phrase.  However I don’t even think that the world “anti” needs to be applied, just being labelled as a humanitarian would do the job nicely.

Now before I get the label anti-Semitic attached to me, I am not anti-Jewish and I stand side by side with all of the peace loving Jewish people scattered throughout the world including those Jewish people inside Israel itself, who oppose the actions of the State of Israel.  So if I am anti-Semitic then there are a lot of Jewish people who are anti-Semitic as well – which doesn’t make that much sense really, unless of course there is an issue with the State of Israel and we are really against Zionism.

If you are legitimately protesting about the human rights abuses by the State of Israel and you are labelled as anti-Semitic then be proud, because it means that you are doing the right thing by speaking out.  Don’t let that word gag you from saying what needs to be said.  You know in your heart if you are speaking the truth, you know if you are anti-Jewish or not.  If you are speaking out against the State of Israel because of its continual human rights abuses, then there is no way that you can be seen as being equivalent to a Nazi, which is how the Zionists want to make you feel or have others see you. You are not the villain here, Zionists are.

I don’t condone the Palestinian violent hostilities in retaliation, however I think any one in their situation for as long as they have been, would struggle not to wage some type of violent resistance.  What generally makes the US media is the Israeli deaths, which are disproportionably low when compared to the Palestinian deaths. Most Israeli civilian deaths generally occur in retaliation of an attack on a Palestinian area by the well armed Israelis.  The Palestinians are then labelled terrorists if they cross into “Israeli land” and kill people in retaliation.  But what does the Israeli military get called when it occupies Palestinian land with heavy armed tanks and rocket launchers and fires missiles into Palestinian homes while the Palestinians are sleeping?  If one of those soldiers dies as the result of their action and they are in Palestinian land, well isn’t that fair considering they are an invading force?  Well apparently not, as the Palestinian who is defending their land and family from the Israeli military, is still labelled a terrorist. 

In contrast to the US media, the European and UK media portrays less biased news coverage when it comes to Israel and Palestine.  No excuse to those in the US with internet access, the information is easily available.  For a start check out this website:  www.ifamericansknew.org

Below is an extract from the article which sparked my opinion.

Is criticism of Israel anti-Semitic?

Shooting the messengers

One reason that the US government, politicians and people don’t have a clear idea of the situation in Israel/Palestine is that any criticism or complaint about Israel, no matter how well-researched and moderate, is swiftly attacked by lobbies in the US as being anti-Semitic.

By Mariano Aguirre

The New York Post editorial on 5 January 2007 read: “How did this man ever become president of the United States?” Readers might have thought this was a crack about President George Bush in a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch. But the editorial went on: “He’s gone from failed president to friend of leftwing tyrants and global scold of anything that represents America’s legitimate interests”; he wanted to “demonise Israel” and had secretly given “PR and political advice to Yasser Arafat”. The Post was damning not Bush, but Jimmy Carter, and it said Democrats should “cut all their ties” to him for “when he flatly condones mass murder, he goes beyond the pale”.

Carter was president from 1977 to 1981, but the editorial was reacting violently to his recent publication of Palestine Peace Not Apartheid (1). In it he wrote that if the Israelis continued their repressive policies in Gaza and the West Bank, blocking any possibility of a Palestinian state, the region could move towards South African-style apartheid: “Two peoples occupying the same land but completely separated from each other, with Israelis totally dominant and suppressing violence by depriving Palestinians of their basic human rights” (2). The [Jewish] Anti-Defamation League responded in the media by accusing Carter of anti-semitic views.

Carter insists that he was talking about Palestine, not the situation in Israel, but there has been vociferous reaction in sections of the US Jewish community. Like the Anti-Defamation League, they take any criticism of Israel to be anti-semitic. The protests have succeeded: both the chairman of the Democrats, Howard Dean, and their leader in Congress, Nancy Pelosi, distanced themselves from Carter. In this early pre-election period the affair was unwelcome and pushed them to take a stance on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

The book continues to sell well, though. Henry Siegman, the Jewish American political analyst and director of the US Middle East Project, sees nothing new or problematic in it, and the reactions only reveal “the ignorance of the American political establishment, both Democrat and Republican, on the subject of the Israel-Palestine conflict” (3).

Carter is director of the Carter Centre for Conflict Resolution, and he engineered the Israeli-Egyptian agreement on the withdrawal of Israeli troops from the Sinai Peninsula before the 1979 Camp David Accords. In the book, he draws on over 30 years of experience in the region and his contacts with its leaders. He explains the background in layman’s terms and provides a balanced account of the options proposed for a lasting settlement, including the need for two independent states and solid guarantees for Israel’s security. An unprejudiced reading shows that, though critical of Israeli policies, he is not hostile to the state, contrary to the claims of his detractors.

Primary obstacle to peace

Carter believes that the region will be plagued by terrorism as long as the Israelis continue their repression, a scandalous belief during the war on terror. He stresses that “Israel’s continued control and colonisation of Palestinian land have been the primary obstacles to a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land”. At the same time he condemns Palestinian terrorism (although not convincingly enough, according to Ethan Bronner in The New York Times on 7 January 2007). He adds that, since the Camp David Accords, successive Israeli governments have been the main obstacles to peace, and points out that the Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin was the first to break the parties’ commitment, under the accords, to UN resolutions 242 and 338, which stress the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war, and call for the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from the West Bank and Gaza and the recognition of the Palestinian people as a separate political entity, with a right to determine their own future.

In Carter’s view, Begin’s actions support the suggestion that no concrete offer was ever made to Yasser Arafat about the creation of a Palestinian state during talks at Camp David in July 2001 with prime minister Ehud Barak and US president Bill Clinton; it is wrong to pretend that Arafat was responsible for blocking the negotiations. Clinton’s special envoy to the Middle East, Dennis Ross, has berated Carter about this (4) but there is plenty of support for his idea elsewhere (5).

In an interview, Carter said: “There is a general feeling throughout the Arab world, throughout Europe, not even noticed in this country, that our present administration has not given any consideration… to the plight of the Palestinians. And you don’t have to be anti-Israel to protect the rights of the Palestinians to have their own land and to live in peace and without being subjugated by an occupying power.” Such views may be current in Europe and the Arab world, but they are less frequently heard in the US. Carter accuses the Bush government of abandoning the Palestinians to their fate, and Israel of blocking any possibility of an accord. The refusal of the Bush and Olmert administrations to negotiate with Palestine’s Fatah-Hamas coalition in March 2007 proved this.

In response to the attacks on his references to apartheid, Carter explained: “The alternative to peace is apartheid, not inside Israel… but in the West Bank and Gaza and East Jerusalem, the Palestinian territory. And there, apartheid exists in its more despicable forms; Palestinians are deprived of basic human rights.” For Carter there are three essentials for peace in the region: guarantees on Israel’s security, an end to Palestinian violence, and recognition by Israel of the Palestinians’ right to a state in its pre-1967 borders.

Worse than South Africa

Carter said that life in the West Bank can be more oppressive for the Palestinians than it was for South Africa’s black population. Israel is becoming less dependent on Palestinian labour, as work-seeking migrants arrive from other countries in the region, while the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank has led to a military presence far more obtrusive than there used to be in South Africa. Israeli settlers have occupied Palestinian land and Israel has introduced sophisticated movement controls to protect them and their settlements.

To read more click on the title of this article.

Yesterday I posted an article titled: Blaming Islam - Examining The Religion Building Enterprise.

It was an article of the same name written by Dr Louay Safi and the article was posted at iViews.com and here is a direct link to the article.

http://www.iviews.com/articles/articles.asp?ref=IN0708-3354

I posted a comment in regards to this article in my original post, but I have decided to make it into a separate post.

If what Dr Safi is true and we always have to assess any article that we read for its validity and not just assume it is true, but if in this case his argument has some truth to it, then I wonder what we should make of the neoconservative movement.  I will let you come to your own conclusions, but here is my comment from the before mentioned post.

I would like to draw any readers who may be interested to this extract from the quoted article:

The blame game is led today by neoconservative pundits who often present Islam as the new villain to be confronted by American military power. They have consistently presented Muslims as incapable of democratic rule, and who espouse values that are antithetical to world peace and religious tolerance.

To ensure that their views are not challenged by the academic community, neoconservatives are working hard to undermine academic freedom by intimidating scholars that present a balanced view of the Middle East. Martin Kramer's Ivory Towers on Sand: The Failure of Middle Eastern Studies in America, a diatribe against Middle East Studies in U.S. universities, and Daniel Pipes' Campus Watch, an organization devoted to smearing professors critical of U.S. foreign policy and Israeli's treatment of Palestinians, are two such examples. This campaign is one that aims to intimidate free thinking on Middle East politics and silence voices that challenge their perspective.

Although many of the anti-Islam writers and neoconservative pundits play on the fear of the general public by publishing books for a general audience, others have been done for policymakers under the cover of respected institutions and think tanks, such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and the RAND Corporation.

I would now like to draw your attention to an extract from an entry that I posted:

Fourteen Defining Characteristics of Fascism

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

While I am at it why don't I just throw this one in as well, I was only going to highlight one point which is why they are all out of order, but I realised that in just that small section from the quoted article there were a few indicators of fascism that I could throw in. So one more:

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.