Jamal Khashoggi was geen groot criticus van de Saoedische dictatuur en bepaald geen held

As`ad AbuKhalil schrijver van het hieronder opgenomen bericht, eerder gepubliceerd op Consortium News, stelt dat de in feite hysterische reactie in het westen en dan m.n. die van westerse massamedia over de verdwijning van Khashoggi voor een fiks deel een onoordeelkundige beeld geeft over 'journalist' Khashoggi.

Zonder de vele artikelen van Khashoggi te hebben gelezen die in Saoedi-Arabië werden gepubliceerd en zonder veel van diens leven te weten, hebben ze in feite een ex-fanatiek aanhanger van het Saoedisch koningshuis (bloederige dictators) schoon gewassen.......

Khashoggi was heel lang een groot bewonderaar van het Saoedische koningshuis en heeft zich het grootste deel van zijn leven achter deze dictatuur en al haar bloederige uitspattingen geschaard.........

Khashoggi zou zelfs aan de kant van Osama bin Laden hebben gevochten, al was het dan als embedded journalist......

Vergeet niet dat alle jaren dat Khashoggi in Saoedi-Arabië werkte, echte journalistiek niet was toegestaan, laat staan kritiek leveren op de dictatuur....... Collega's die door de dictatuur van S-A werden opgepakt en gemarteld vanwege 'de geur van kritiek' in hun berichtgeving, behoefden niet te rekenen op steun van Khashoggi.......

Zelf concludeer ik na een aantal columns van Khashoggi in de Washington Post* (WaPo) te hebben gelezen, dat Khashoggi weliswaar vuile handen heeft gemaakt in Saoedi-Arabië, al was het maar het niet opkomen voor collega's die niet zo braaf waren en zwaar werden gestraft, maar hij in de VS wel degelijk fiks tekeerging tegen S-A en bijvoorbeeld haar smerige oorlog in Jemen (die hij overigens niet als genocide aanduidde, zoals het overgrote deel van de westerse collega's dat nalaten)......

Er is niet veel nodig om de doodstraf te krijgen in S-A en gezien een aantal van zijn columns overschreed hij daarmee een lijn, die waarschijnlijk tot zijn dood leidde..... Zo had hij verder kritiek op o.a de blokkade van Qatar en de propaganda van S-A tegen Iran, zaken die in S-A 'doodstrafwaardig' zijn...... Kortom Khashoggi is ten inkeer gekomen, wat hem niet vrijpleit van het jarenlang propaganda maken voor het bloederige Saoedische koningshuis.

Lees het artikel van AbuKhalil en oordeel zelf:

Jamal Khashoggi Was No Critic of the Saudi Regime

October 16, 2018 at 10:51 am

Written by Consortium News

Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist, who disappeared in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last week is not quite the critic of the Saudi regime that the Western media says he is.

(CN Op-ed) — The disappearance of Jamal Khashoggi, the Saudi journalist, in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last week has generated huge international publicity, but unsurprisingly, little in Saudi-controlled, Arab media. The Washington Post, for whom Khashoggi wrote, and other Western media, have kept the story alive, increasing the pressure on Riyadh to explain its role in the affair.

It’s been odd to read about Khashoggi in Western media. David Hirst in The Guardian claimed Khashoggi merely cared about absolutes such as “truth, democracy, and freedom”. Human Rights Watch’s director described him as representing “outspoken and critical journalism.”

But did he pursue those absolutes while working for Saudi princes?

Khashoggi was a loyal member of the Saudi propaganda apparatus. There is no journalism allowed in the kingdom: there have been courageous Saudi women and men who attempted to crack the wall of rigid political conformity and were persecuted and punished for their views. Khashoggi was not among them.

Some writers suffered while Khashoggi was their boss at Al-Watan newspaper. Khashoggi—contrary to what is being written—was never punished by the regime, except lightly two years ago, when Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) banned him from tweeting and writing for Al-Hayat, the London-based, pan-Arab newspaper owned by Saudi Prince Khalid bin Sultan.

By historical contrast, Nasir As-Sa`id was a courageous secular Arab Nationalist writer who fled the kingdom in 1956 and settled in Cairo, and then Beirut. He authored a massive (though tabloid-like) volume about the history of the House of Saud. He was unrelenting in his attacks against the Saudi royal family.

For this, the Saudi regime paid a corrupt PLO leader in Beirut (Abu Az-Za`im, tied to Jordanian intelligence) to get rid of As-Sa`id. He kidnapped As-Sa`id from a crowded Beirut street in 1979 and delivered him to the Saudi embassy there. He was presumably tortured and killed (some say his body was tossed from a plane over the “empty quarter” desert in Saudi Arabia). Such is the track record of the regime.

Finding the Right Prince

Khashoggi was an ambitious young reporter who knew that to rise in Saudi journalism you don’t need professionalism, courage, or ethics. In Saudi Arabia, you need to attach yourself to the right prince. Early on, Khashoggi became close to two of them: Prince Turki Al-Faysal (who headed Saudi intelligence) and his brother, Prince Khalid Al-Faysal, who owned Al-Watan (The Motherland) where Khashoggi had his first (Arabic) editing job.

Khashoggi distinguished himself with an eagerness to please and an uncanny ability to adjust his views to those of the prevailing government. In the era of anti-Communism and the promotion of fanatical jihad in Afghanistan and elsewhere, Khashoggi was a true believer. He fought with Osama bin Laden and promoted the cause of the Mujahideen.

The Washington Post‘s David Ignatius and others want to embellish this by implying that he was an “embedded” reporter—as if bin Laden’s army would invite independent journalists to report on their war efforts. The entire project of covering the Afghan Mujahideen and promoting them in the Saudi press was the work of the chief of Saudi intelligence, Prince Turki, Khashoggi’s principal patron-prince.

Western media coverage of Khashoggi’s career (by people who don’t know Arabic) presents a picture far from reality. They portray a courageous investigative journalist upsetting the Saudi regime. Nothing is further from the truth: there is no journalism in Saudi Arabia; there is only crude and naked propaganda.

Editors are trusted individuals who have demonstrated long-time loyalty. Khashoggi admitted to an Arab reporter last year in an interview from Istanbul that in Saudi Arabia he had been both editor and censor. Editors of Saudi regime papers (mouthpieces of princes and kings) enforce government rules and eliminate objectionable material.

Khashoggi never spoke out for Saudis in distress. He ran into trouble in two stints as Al-Watan editor because of articles he published by other writers, not by himself, that were mildly critical of the conservative religious establishment—which he at times supported. He was relocated to another government media job— to shield him from the religious authorities.

Khashoggi was the go-to man for Western journalists covering the kingdom, appointed to do so by the regime. He may have been pleasant in conversation with reporters but he never questioned the royal legitimacy. And that goes for his brief one-year stint in Washington writing for the Post.

A Reactionary

Khashoggi was a reactionary: he supported all monarchies and sultanates in the region and contended they were “reformable.” To him, only the secular republics, in tense relations with the Saudis, such as Iraq, Syria and Libya, defied reform and needed to be overthrown. He favored Islamization of Arab politics along Muslim Brotherhood lines.

Khashoggi’s vision was an “Arab uprising” led by the Saudi regime. In his Arabic writings he backed MbS’s “reforms” and even his “war on corruption,” derided in the region and beyond. He thought that MbS’s arrests of the princes in the Ritz were legitimate (though he mildly criticized them in a Post column) even as his last sponsoring prince, Al-Walid bin Talal, was locked up in the luxury hotel. Khashoggi even wanted to be an advisor to MbS, who did not trust him and turned him down.

Writing in the Post (with an Arabic version) Khashoggi came across as a liberal Democrat favoring democracy and reform. But he didn’t challenge Saudi regime legitimacy or Western Mideast policy. Mainstream journalists were enamored with him. They saw him as an agreeable Arab who didn’t criticize their coverage of the region, but praised it, considering the mainstream U.S. press the epitome of professional journalism. Khashoggi was essentially a token Arab writing for a paper with a regrettable record of misrepresenting Arabs.

In Arabic, his Islamist sympathies with Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan) were unmistakable. Forgotten or little known in the West is that during the Cold War the Saudis sponsored, funded, and nurtured the Muslim Brotherhood as a weapon against the progressive, secular camp led by Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser. Ikhwan controlled the Saudi educational system raising Saudi students to admire the Brotherhood. But Sep. 11 changed the Saudi calculus: the rulers wanted a scapegoat for their role in sponsoring Islamist fanaticism and the Ikhwan was the perfect target. That made Khashoggi suspect too.

Hints Against Him

Recent articles in the Saudi press hinted that the regime might move against him. He had lost his patrons but the notion that Khashoggi was about to launch an Arab opposition party was not credible. The real crime was that Khashoggi was backed alone by Ikhwan supporters, namely the Qatari regime and the Turkish government.

A writer in Okaz, a daily in Jeddah, accused him of meeting with the Emir of Qatar at the Four Seasons Hotel in New York and of having ties to “regional and international intelligence services.” If true it may have sealed his fate. Qatar is now the number one enemy of the Saudi regime—arguably worse than Iran.

Khashoggi was treated as a defector and one isn’t allowed to defect from the Saudi Establishment. The last senior defections were back in 1962, when Prince Talal and Prince Badr joined Nasser’s Arab nationalist movement in Egypt.

Khashoggi had to be punished in a way that would send shivers down the spine of other would-be defectors.

By As`ad AbuKhalil / Republished with permission / Consortium News / Report a typo

====================================

* 'Read Jamal Khashoggi’s columns for The Washington Post' 

Zie ook:
'Bolton (o.a. Trumps adviseur buitenlandse zaken) wil de Khashoggi tapes niet horen, hij is het arabisch niet machtig....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Khashoggi: VS prijs voor uit de wind houden van Saoedische terreurkroonprins MBS >> 450 miljard dollar'

'Trump geeft toe dat de VS niets te maken heeft met het beleid in andere landen >> 'gelukkigen' in deze: de moordenaars van Khashoggi.......'

'Trump weet het zeker, de top van de Saoedische dictatuur wist niet van de moord op Khashoggi....'

'Tony Blair weigert na de moord op Khashoggi een lucratieve deal met Saoedi-Arabië op te zeggen'

'Saoedi-Arabië vindt zich een baken van licht tegen het duister verspreidende Iran..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Macron (Franse president) laat ware gezicht zien op vraag over wapenleveringen aan Saoedi-Arabië'

''Onderzoek' naar moord op Khashoggi in Saoedisch consulaat te Istanbul voorafgegaan door grote schoonmaakactie........'

'Khashoggi waarschijnlijk vermoord vanwege kennis over de 9/11 aanslagen'

'Khashoggi terecht groot in media, waar de aandacht voor Saoedische genocide op sjiieten Jemen amper wordt genoemd'

'Saoedi-Arabië heeft 15 'psychopathische macho's nodig om één journalist te vermoorden'

Khashoggi waarschijnlijk vermoord vanwege kennis over de 9/11 aanslagen

De Saoedisch journalist Khashoggi, die naar grote waarschijnlijkheid is vermoord in het Saoedische consulaat in Istanbul, zou op de hoogte kunnen zijn geweest van de aanslagen tegen o.a. het WTC op 11 september 2001.

Daar Khashoggi in ongenade was gevallen bij de reli-fascistische dictatuur van Saoedi-Arabië, was hij het land ontvlucht en werkte hij voor de Washington Post. In zijn artikelen deed Khashoggi een boek open o.a. over kroonprins bin Salman (MBS)

Finian Cunningham schreef een artikel op Information Clearing House, waarin hij openbaart dat figuren uit de geheime diensten van de VS op de hoogte waren van de Saoedische plannen Khashoggi te ontvoeren en deze hebben verzuimd hem te waarschuwen...... Hieruit zou je inderdaad kunnen afleiden dat de VS zelf al niet blij was met Khashoggi, het waarom zou kunnen duiden op kennis bij Khashoggi van de 9/11 aanslagen in 2001. 

De daders van die aanslagen, aangestuurd door de geheime diensten van de VS, kwamen voor het grootste deel uit Saoedi-Arabië. Het is intussen wel zeker dat 9/11 een false flag operatie was, waarvan vooral de VS heeft geprofiteerd en waarmee men de weg vrij maakte voor nog meer illegale oorlogen tegen landen die de VS niet gehoorzaam genoeg vindt...... VS terreur waarmee sinds 2001 meer dan 2 miljoen mensen werden vermoord..... 

Cunningham geeft nog veel meer argumenten, lees zijn artikel en oordeel zelf:

Did Saudis, CIA Fear Khashoggi 9/11 Bombshell?

By Finian Cunningham

October 14, 2018 "Information Clearing House" -  The macabre case of missing journalist Jamal Khashoggi raises the question: did Saudi rulers fear him revealing highly damaging information on their secret dealings? In particular, possible involvement in the 9/11 terror attacks on New York in 2001.

Even more intriguing are US media reports now emerging that American intelligence had snooped on and were aware of Saudi officials making plans to capture Khashoggi prior to his apparent disappearance at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last week. If the Americans knew the journalist’s life was in danger, why didn’t they tip him off to avoid his doom?


Jamal Khashoggi (59) had gone rogue, from the Saudi elite’s point of view. Formerly a senior editor in Saudi state media and an advisor to the royal court, he was imminently connected and versed in House of Saud affairs. As one commentator cryptically put it: “He knew where all the bodies were buried.”

For the past year, Khashoggi went into self-imposed exile, taking up residence in the US, where he began writing opinion columns for the Washington Post.

Khashoggi’s articles appeared to be taking on increasingly critical tone against the heir to the Saudi throne, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman. The 33-year-old Crown Prince, or MbS as he’s known, is de facto ruler of the oil-rich kingdom, in place of his aging father, King Salman.

While Western media and several leaders, such as Presidents Trump and Macron, have been indulging MbS as “a reformer”, Khashoggi was spoiling this Saudi public relations effort by criticizing the war in Yemen, the blockade on Qatar and the crackdown on Saudi critics back home.

However, what may have caused the Saudi royals more concern was what Khashoggi knew about darker, dirtier matters. And not just the Saudis, but American deep state actors as well.

He was formerly a media aide to Prince Turki al Faisal*, who is an eminence gris figure in Saudi intelligence, with its systematic relations to American and British counterparts. Prince Turki’s father, Faisal, was formerly the king of Saudi Arabia until his assassination in 1975 by a family rival. Faisal was a half-brother of the present king, Salman, and therefore Prince Turki is a cousin of the Crown Prince – albeit at 73 more than twice his age.



For nearly 23 years, from 1977 to 2001, Prince Turki was the director of the Mukhabarat, the Saudi state intelligence apparatus. He was instrumental in Saudi, American and British organization of the mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan to combat Soviet forces. Those militants in Afghanistan later evolved into the al Qaeda terror network, which has served as a cat’s paw in various US proxy wars across the Middle East, North Africa and Central Asia, including Russia’s backyard in the Caucasus.


Ten days before the 9/11 terror attacks on New York City, in which some 3,000 Americans died, Prince Turki retired from his post as head of Saudi intelligence. It was an abrupt departure, well before his tenure was due to expire.

There has previously been speculation in US media that this senior Saudi figure knew in advance that something major was going down on 9/11. At least 15 of the 19 Arabs who allegedly hijacked three commercial airplanes that day were Saudi nationals.

Prince Turki has subsequently been named in a 2002 lawsuit mounted by families of 9/11 victims. There is little suggestion he was wittingly involved in organizing the terror plot. Later public comments indicated that Prince Turki was horrified by the atrocity. But the question is: did he know of the impending incident, and did he alert US intelligence, which then did not take appropriate action to prevent it?


Jamal Khashoggi had long served as a trusted media advisor to Prince Turki, before the latter resigned from public office in 2007. Following 9/11, Turki was the Saudi ambassador to both the US and Britain.

A tentative idea here is that Khashoggi, in his close dealings with Prince Turki over the years, may have gleaned highly sensitive inside information on what actually happened on 9/11. Were the Arab hijackers mere patsies used by the American CIA to facilitate an event which has since been used by American military planners to launch a global “war on terror” as a cover for illegal wars overseas? There is a huge body of evidence that the 9/11 attacks were indeed a “false flag” event orchestrated by the US deep state as a pretext for its imperialist rampages.

The apparent abduction and murder last week of Jamal Khashoggi seems such an astoundingly desperate move by the Saudi rulers. More evidence is emerging from Turkish sources that the journalist was indeed lured to the consulate in Istanbul where he was killed by a 15-member hit squad. Reports are saying that the alleged assassination was ordered at the highest level of the Saudi royal court, which implicates Crown Prince MbS.

Why would the Saudi rulers order such a heinous act, which would inevitably lead to acute political problems, as we are seeing in the fallout from governments and media coverage around the world?

Over the past year, the House of Saud had been appealing to Khashoggi to return to Riyadh and resume his services as a media advisor to the royal court. He declined, fearing that something more sinister was afoot. When Khashoggi turned up in Istanbul to collect a divorce document from the Saudi consulate on September 28, it appears that the House of Saud decided to nab him. He was told to return to the consulate on October 2. On that same day, the 15-member group arrived from Riyadh on two private Gulfstream jets for the mission to kill him.

Official Saudi claims stretch credulity. They say Khashoggi left the consulate building unharmed by a backdoor, although they won’t provide CCTV images to prove that. The Turks say their own CCTV facilities monitoring the front and back of the Saudi consulate show that Khashoggi did not leave the premises. The Turks seem confident of their claim he was murdered inside the building, his remains dismembered and removed in diplomatic vehicles. The two private jets left the same day from Istanbul with the 15 Saudis onboard to return to Riyadh, via Cairo and Dubai.

To carry out such a reckless act, the Saudis must have been alarmed by Khashoggi’s critical commentaries appearing in the Washington Post. The columns appeared to be delivering more and more damaging insights into the regime under Crown Prince MbS.

The Washington Post this week is reporting that US intelligence sources knew from telecom intercepts that the Saudis were planning to abduct Khashoggi. That implicates the House of Saud in a dastardly premeditated act of murder.

But furthermore this same disclosure could also, unwittingly, implicate US intelligence. If the latter knew of a malicious intent towards Khashoggi, why didn’t US agents warn him about going to the Saudi consulate in Istanbul? Surely, he could have obtained the same personal documents from the Saudi embassy in Washington DC, a country where he was residing and would have been safer.

Jamal Khashoggi may have known too many dark secrets about US and Saudi intel collusion, primarily related to the 9/11 terror incidents. And with his increasing volubility as a critical journalist in a prominent American news outlet, it may have been time to silence him. The Saudis as hitmen, the American CIA as facilitators.

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master’s graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.


This article was originally published by "Strategic Culture Foundation" -  
=========================================
* In Nederlands: Turki bin Faisal al-Saoed ('T. bin Faisal' als label onder dit bericht, dit is overigens de eerste keer dat ik deze Saoedische 'prins' noem).

Zie ook:
'Bolton (o.a. Trumps adviseur buitenlandse zaken) wil de Khashoggi tapes niet horen, hij is het arabisch niet machtig....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Khashoggi: VS prijs voor uit de wind houden van Saoedische terreurkroonprins MBS >> 450 miljard dollar'

'Trump geeft toe dat de VS niets te maken heeft met het beleid in andere landen >> 'gelukkigen' in deze: de moordenaars van Khashoggi.......'

'Trump weet het zeker, de top van de Saoedische dictatuur wist niet van de moord op Khashoggi....'

'Tony Blair weigert na de moord op Khashoggi een lucratieve deal met Saoedi-Arabië op te zeggen'

'Saoedi-Arabië vindt zich een baken van licht tegen het duister verspreidende Iran..... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Macron (Franse president) laat ware gezicht zien op vraag over wapenleveringen aan Saoedi-Arabië'

'Jamal Khashoggi was geen groot criticus van de Saoedische dictatuur en bepaald geen held'

''Onderzoek' naar moord op Khashoggi in Saoedisch consulaat te Istanbul voorafgegaan door grote schoonmaakactie........'

'Khashoggi terecht groot in media, waar de aandacht voor Saoedische genocide op sjiieten Jemen amper wordt genoemd'

'Read Jamal Khashoggi’s columns for The Washington Post' 

Voor meer berichten over de 9/11 aanslagen, klik op het label '911' direct onder dit bericht.

PS: gisteren hebben Turkije en Saoedi-Arabië een onderzoek gedaan in het consulaat in Istanbul, daaraan voorafgaand heeft een schoonmaakploeg het consulaat grondig gereinigd, daarover later deze dag meer.

CNN en andere media met doorzichtige oorlogspropaganda tegen de Syrische regering

Caitlin Johnstone heeft een artikel geschreven over de uiterst doorzichtige propaganda gebracht door de reguliere (massa-) media. Hiervoor haalt ze het voorbeeld aan van het 7 jarige meisje Bana Alabed dat werd 'geïnterviewd' door CNN 'journalist' Alisyn Camerota. Uit dit interview blijkt duidelijk dat het meisje zaken noemde die te ingewikkeld zijn voor een kind van haar leeftijd, bovendien was duidelijk te zien dat Bana zaken voorlas van een 'tele prompter', niet alleen door de beweging van haar ogen, maar ook door woorden in delen op te lezen, waar duidelijk uit blijkt dat ze niet begreep waar ze het over had.......

Zoals altijd met propaganda is deze bedoeld om het volk achter een oorlog of een aanval te krijgen, vandaar ook dat men keer op keer als er over Assad wordt gesproken in die reguliere media, de superlatieven niet van de lucht zijn, zo is hij o.a. al omschreven als duivels, een bloedige dictator en vergasser van kinderen en de rest van zijn bevolking...... Niet dat voor dat laatste, dus de vergassing van burgers, bewijzen zijn, echter door het te blijven herhalen (terwijl al lang is bewezen dat Assad niet achter die aanvallen met gifgas zat) wordt het volk dusdanig gehersenspoeld dat ze de leugens gaan geloven en zelfs militair ingrijpen eisen......... Zoals je begrijpt geldt dat al helemaal voor de andere gebruikte superlatieven.

Het meest lullig is wel dat ook president Trump die leugens gelooft en minstens twee keer actie heeft ondernomen tegen Syrië, op basis van (valse) anti-Assad propaganda op Fox.......

Lees het uitgebreid op basis van feiten (via links) geschreven artikel van Johnstone en geeft het ajb door! Het is tijd dat het volk, ook in Nederland, eindelijk inziet dat het bijna dagelijks wordt voorgelogen en niet zelden over meerdere onderwerpen...... Neem alleen al de steun voor financiering van 'gematigde rebellen', die terreurgroepen bleken te zijn*, of zie de berichtgeving voorafgaand aan en tijdens de oorlog tegen Irak in 2003......

That Time CNN Staged a Fake Interview With a Syrian Child for War Propaganda

September 10, 2018 at 7:54 pm

Written by Caitlin Johnstone

(CJ Opinion) — Imagine if you and some friends wandered into a completely dark room together for some reason. You’ve never been in this room before, and you can’t see a thing.

Now imagine one of your friends says he can see everything in the room perfectly, and starts describing the different things that he sees in a confident, assertive tone of voice. You know for a fact that there’s no light in the room, so you are doubtful that your friend is able to see any better than you are, but one by one your other friends start talking about the objects in the room as though what he is saying is true. After a while your group starts telling you you’re crazy and evil because you remain skeptical of your first friend’s ability to see the room in pitch darkness, despite his assertive tone of voice and despite the fact that everyone else believes it.

Western public discourse about Syria is very much the same. All the time I get people coming up yelling at me about what a butcher Bashar al-Assad is, how he loves gassing children because he’s an evil monster, how he’s killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in his own country out of sheer sadism, and all I can say to them is, you don’t know that. You don’t know any of those things, you’re just pretending you do because that’s what everyone else is doing. I know you don’t know any of those things because you’re looking at the same information landscape as I am, and it’s chock full of war propaganda. The media matrix is too full of obvious psyops meant to manufacture public consent for military interventionism in Syria for any westerner to have a clear idea of what’s actually happening in that country.

And we know this for a fact, as sure as you know when you’re in a dark room. Take the time CNN knowingly staged a fake, scripted interview with a seven year-old Syrian girl last year and passed it off to its audience as a real interview.

I point this out to my readers every few months, and I expect I will continue to do so for as long as western war propaganda is a problem. In April of last year, following a  hotly  disputed  accusation of chemical weapons use in Idlib province, a little girl named Bana Alabed was paraded before the audience of CNN’s New Day in an interview with Alisyn Camerota. Bana was seven years old at the time, yet was seen in the interview providing complex ideas and geopolitical analysis that she could not possibly have understood. Her eyes moved back and forth as though reading from a teleprompter, and she sounded out the words in English (a language she doesn’t appear to have understood at the time) syllable-by-syllable in a way you’ve never heard any child speak in your life.

It was a fake interview passed off as a real one, scripted and passed off as spontaneous. It’s as clear as day for anyone to see. And Alisyn Camerota necessarily had the other half of that script, since she needed to know what questions to feed the child. It was a coordinated deception of CNN’s audience, meant to sell the unpopular idea of yet another military intervention in yet another Middle Eastern country, aired on America’s most trusted and well-known nationwide news network. It was as brazen a deception as you could possibly imagine, on as mainstream a platform as you could possibly get, advancing a narrative clearly intended to manufacture support for an agenda which could potentially devastate an entire region. That happened. They did that. If they’ll do that, there’s nothing they won’t do.

And now, as things are heating up in Idlib, we’ve got America’s UN ambassador saying that any sign of chemical weapons use will be immediately blamed on the Assad government and retaliated against despite the known presence of Al-Qaeda affiliates who’d have every incentive to stage such an attack, and despite the complete absence of motive for Assad. We’ve got State

Department officials saying the Trump administration has reversed its policy of withdrawing from Syria and saying no campaign to liberate Idlib from its terrorist occupiers will be tolerated. And we’ve got Youtube suddenly suspending Syrian government accounts to better ensure total narrative control.

Caitlin Johnstone@caitoz

Whoever controls the narrative controls the world.

H.K 

✔@Ibra_Joudeh

#Youtube shuts down all pro Syrian channels including, Sama TV, Syrian MoD, Sana news agency, Syrian presidency

5:11 PM - Sep 8, 2018

• 916
• 675 people are talking about this

They are lying to us about what is happening in Syria. We know that for a fact, just like we now for a fact when we are in a dark room. And we know for a fact that the US and its allies have been scheming to effect regime change in that very nation, the nation immediately adjacent to their previous regime change target Iraq, for many years. We know that they have been planning to orchestrate a violent uprising in Syria since long before violence erupted in 2011, and we know that it erupted as they had planned. I posted the evidence for this in a recent article, but here it is again just to make sure more people see it:

• Here is a 2006 WikiLeaks cable in which the US government is seen exploring possible factions which could be incentivized to rise up against Assad, and ways in which psyops could be used to ensure widespread violence.
• Here is a declassified CIA memo from 1986 in which the Central Intelligence Agency is seen exploring ways in which sectarian tensions can be inflamed to provoke a violent uprising in Syria. Here is a useful articlefeaturing excerpts from the memo showing some jarring parallels between what was being planned and what happened a quarter century later.
• Here is a video clip of General Wesley Clark naming Syria among the countries scheduled by the Pentagon for regime change in the wake of 9/11.
• Here is a video clip of the former Foreign Minister of France stating in plain language that he was informed by British government insiders in 2009 that a violent Syrian uprising was being planned, two years before the violence erupted.
• Here is an article featuring a video of the former Qatari Prime Minister stating that the US and its allies were involved in the violence from the very beginning.
• Here is an article from May of 2011 reporting on some of the extremely suspicious provocations that led to the outbreak of widespread violence. Here’s another from March 2011. Here’s another from December 2011.

So don’t be fooled. Remember, the reason they work so hard to manufacture our consent for these agendas is because they need that consent in order to operate. If they try to operate without our consent, they will lose control of the narrative, and thus lose their ability to propagandize us effectively. So don’t give them your consent. Fight their lies on all fronts, using truth, skepticism and critical thinking as your weapon. Stand tall, shine bright, refuse to be ignored, don’t wait for your turn to speak, use unmitigated speech, say what needs to be said and say it like you’re right, because you are.

Let a giant “NO” to this manipulation roar through us all. Let the Syrian people be free from imperialist agendas once and for all. Let us all be free from imperialist agendas once and for all. End the madness and begin moving into sanity.

Support Caitlin’s work on Patreon or Paypal.

Opinion by Caitlin Johnstone / Republished with permission / Medium / Report a typo

===================================

* Zie: ''Gematigde' terreurgroepen in Syrië kregen Nederlands belastinggeld om te moorden, verkrachten, martelen en om te roven.......' met vervolg: 'Arrestatie Rutte, Koenders, Zijlstra en Blok wegens hulp aan terreurgroepen in Syrië van hoogste belang'

Zie ook:
'BBC weer met anti-Syrische propaganda en veel aandacht voor de geweldige Turken en hun leider Erdogan'

'Gifgasaanval Douma in elkaar gezet door 'gematigde rebellen''

'VS heeft opstand en daarmee de oorlog in Syrië georganiseerd, zo toont WikiLeaks ten overvloede nog eens aan.......'

'Gifgasaanval Idlib: de komende 'kindslachtoffers' worden getraind door terreurgroep White Helmets.........'

'Tulsi Gabbard (VS congres Hawaï): Trump is de beschermende Big Brother van Al Qaida'

'Voorbeeld BBC en AD propaganda inzake Idlib (Syrië)'

'VS begint 'troll farm', alsof Hollywood en de massamedia al niet genoeg VS propaganda maken..........'

'Massamedia VS vergeven van CIA 'veteranen', alsof die media nog niet genoeg 'fake news' ofwel leugens brengen........'

'John Bolton geeft terreurgroepen in Syrië de opdracht een false flag gifgasaanval uit te voeren'

'Assad heeft geen gifgas gebruikt tegen de Syrische bevolking!'

'Oost-Ghouta, wat je niet wordt verteld'

'BBC World Service en BNR met 'fake news' over Ghouta........'

'Syrische nonnen spreken zich uit tegen de oorlogspropaganda van westerse mogendheden en de reguliere westerse (massa-) media'

'Syrië: nieuwe gifgasaanval als 'false flag' operatie tegen Syrisch bewind in voorbereiding........'

'Ghouta: een gifgas false flag en VS chef Guterres eist staakt het vuren van pro-Syrische strijdgroepen op Oost-Ghouta......'

'Van Kappen (VVD) noemt 'stapelaanwijzingen' het bewijs en is blij met raketaanval VS op Syrische basis,  een aanval zonder enig echt bewijs voor Syrische schuld.......'

'Sico van der Meer ('deskundige' Clingendael) weet niet, dat Israël en Egypte grote hoeveelheden gifgas maken en op voorraad hebben..........'

'Koenders en SOHR melden gifgasaanval, reguliere media als NOS nemen bericht van SOHR (propaganda en 'fake news' orgaan) over'

'Rutte: raketaanval VS tegen Syrische basis was begrijpelijk en proportioneel, ook al is er geen bewijs voor Syrische schuld........'

'Haley (VS ambassadeur bij VN) herhaalde in VN, voorafgaand aan raketaanval, het smerige spel van Powell in 2002, aanleiding tot illegale oorlog tegen Irak.......'  

'Koenders (PvdA BuZa): Assad is schuldig aan gifgasaanval en is een 'criminele recidivist......' ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Esther de Lange (CDA): het afschieten door de VS van raketten op een Syrische basis 'was even nodig...........''

'Al Jazeera filmde een onderdeel van de 'gifgasshow' in Kahn Sheikhoun...........'

'Vlaamse pater roept op niet langer de westerse anti-Syrië propaganda te geloven!'

'VS bereid tot militair ingrijpen tegen de regering Assad >> aanleiding: gifgas leugens van o.a. de VS zelf.......'

'Bernard Hammelburg (BNR): Assad is een monster waar we mee moeten samenwerken.........'

'Van Baalen (VVD) het is moeilijk te zien wie je moet steunen: Al Qaida, Al Qaida of Al Qaida....... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!'

'Roger Waters (Pink Floyd) laat weten hoe White Helmets vips rekruteren met Saoedisch geld....'

''False flag terror' bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken..........' 

'Sophie in 't Veld (D66): het afschieten door de VS van raketten op een Syrische basis 'was even nodig...........''

'VS geeft toe dat er geen bewijs is voor het gebruik van gifgas 'door Assad', ofwel: alweer 'fake news' van de massamedia doorgeprikt!'

'Genocidale aanval op sjiitische vluchtelingen uit Foua en Kefraya wordt door massamedia afgedaan als 'een ongelukje', of  volgens CNN zelfs als een 'hiccup.........'

'Exactly how the US trained and armed ISIS'