It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Pentagon acknowledges fabricating a 'Zarqawi Legend'

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Some people just don't want to give up the belief in a lie, even when the liar admits it's a lie. I guess it's because they've either invested too much in the lie themselves, or just don't want the government that they've been told their whole lives to believe gives them a reason not to.

It's a little sad really, but I'm willing to bet that if the administration came out tomorrow and said they blew up the towers, half the population would still be on their side.




posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   
Al-Zarqawi is the face, the figure the US needed to make the Iraqi Resistance in it's entire form to be evil, mad psychotic. The mad odd fellow who chops people's heads off.

Al-Zarqawi has been blown up and magnified in his importance because it serves the US military 'hearts and minds' battle with the US population well in it'c combat with Iraqi insurgents.

Al Zarqawi's name really sprung forth when the other bogeyman apparently pulling the strings, Saddam was captured.

Bin Laden was the first bogeyman, but because The Bush Administration itched for a War In Iraq Saddam became the next bogeyman, Bin Laden was forgotten (Bush said he don't care where he is) Saddam became the new threat to the American Way Of life, forgetting that the CIA backed Saddam in the 80's.

The next bogeyman is Ahmadinejad. Unlike Bin Laden, Saddam and Al-Zarqawi, he is a person who holds wide audiences for the US administration to make fear factor from.

Always a bogeyman is needed, the fear he hides under your bed, or is planning a dirty bomb at your local shopping centre.

The fear of the bogeyman coming to get you makes the child behave, so it makes the populace behave.

Always that fear, to maginify a figure of opposition to make the public fear and hate and back war, war, war and back the government.

These bogeymen for all their nasty deeds, are magnified in their importance and threat.

These bogeymen play the Goldstein role in the scheme of things, Goldstein being the 'terrorist' in 1984, the hate figure who it is not known if he is still alive, who is used to garner support for the Big Brother regime.


After Ahmadinejad, who next?

Kim Jung Il? Hu of China? Solano of the EU?



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 10:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by dgtempe
It is OBVIOUS what happened. To play up, exagerate, blow up a story out of proportions is a lie.


You can nit-pick and word your sentences however you like but the fact still remains that Zarqawi is real and he is fighting our Military in Iraq, end of story. And there's no way to get around that.
[edit on 23-4-2006 by WestPoint23]


How do you know any of that, Westpoint23?



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
To play up, exagerate, blow up a story out of proportions is a lie.

I agree with ya. To exagerate is a lie. To put a face to the evil
that is going on in Iraq is not. Zarqawi was a twerp before
the war. He was evil. He was deadly. But he was a twerp.
A twerp that had to be named. Unfortunately, naming him
propped him up.


I want the truth from my government.

Excellent. Me too. Now, how do we get it? They are
all politicians ... and all politicians lie.
(not being a smart a** here, just an honest question)


That does not make me anti-anything.


You are right. It doesn't.

However, the site provided was totally biased and the
title of this thread is way off. So .... I'd like to see more
information on this from UNBIASED sources. I know that's
a tall order these days and frankly, there are very few
sources that I'd consider unbiased bythemselves. So
perhaps some other sources that can back up the
original would be in order.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Regensturm
Bin Laden was the first bogeyman,


Boogeymen aren't real. UBL is very real.
Ask him. He'll tell ya' that he's 'the man'.
Ask the relatives of the 3,000 dead 9/11 victims.
They'll tell ya. Unlike the boogeyman, UBL is real.
AND he bites!



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 10:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Some people just don't want to give up the belief in a lie,
even when the liar admits it's a lie


And some people don't want to give up the belief that UBL and
Zarqawi aren't real and deadly - even when those two terrorists
admit to being terrorists and that they cause terrorist attacks
Do the 9/11 attacks for UBL and Zarqawi and the Jordan bombings
ring a bell??

[edit on 4/23/2006 by FlyersFan]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Chalk them both up to a long and not so distinguished list of characters the US has armed and funded, then turned around and demonized when it fit the agenda. Yeah they are both real people, but so was St. Nicholas and Davey Crockett.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Muaddib, FlyersFan, and WestPoint23 pronounce with absolute certainty that Zarqawi exists., which is something you fellows could not possibly know with certainty.

When I read posts like the following, which tend to come from the usual suspects like the sun rising in the east, I can't help but wonder whether the posters are on the domestic psyops payroll. It is patently obvious that none of you could possibly have a factual basis for these statements. The boogey man is real . . . in your imagination!

Muaddib says: "Zarqawi does exist * * *"

FlyersFan says: "The title of this thread is dead wrong. T* * * . They did
NOT make him up. He is real. He is deadly."

WestPoint23 says: "* * * the fact still remains that Zarqawi is real and he is fighting our Military in Iraq, end of story. And there's no way to get around that."



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Code_Burger
How do you know any of that, Westpoint23?


Overwhelming evidence points to that, this article does not say that Zarqawi is not real or that he is not fighting in Iraq. Whose in denial here?


Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Some people just don't want to give up the belief in a lie, even when the liar admits it's a lie.


Calm down there Alfonso, read the article and stop staring at the title, then come back an we’ll have a chat, k?


Originally posted by dubiousone
which is something you fellows could not possibly know with certainty.


The only way I could be more sure is If I met him face to face, but then again I haven't met Bill Clinton either however something tells me he’s real.

[edit on 23-4-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:46 PM
link   
FlyersFan says: "And some people don't want to give up the belief that UBL and Zarqawi aren't real and deadly - even when those two terrorists admit to being terrorists and that they cause terrorist attacks. Do the 9/11 attacks for UBL and Zarqawi and the Jordan bombings
ring a bell??"

Some people don't what to give up the belief that mommy and daddy (i.e. government and those in positions of authority) always tell the truth.
Mommy and daddy told us the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause were real. But over time you receive evidence to the contrary, see with your own eyes, hear with your own ears, and think with your own brain. You begin to question what mommy and daddy said and slowly get a grip on reality.

[edit on 4/23/2006 by dubiousone]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by Code_Burger
How do you know any of that, Westpoint23?


Overwhelming evidence points to that,


Overwhelming evidence provided by a source that has just admitted to spending millions on fabricating that 'evidence'?


Originally posted by WestPoint23
this article does not say that Zarqawi is not real or that he is not fighting in Iraq. Whose in denial here?


Notice I haven't once said, anywhere, that Zarqawi is not real, or not fighting in Iraq. Please do not twist things, Westpoint23.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Code_Burger
Overwhelming evidence provided by a source that has just admitted to spending millions on fabricating that 'evidence'?


There are other sources concerning Zarqawi that do not come from the Pentagon. Besides, they did not fabricate the fact that he is real and that he is fighting in Iraq. When you have evidence that the Pentagon did, then come and let me know.


Originally posted by Code_Burger
Notice I haven't once said, anywhere, that Zarqawi is not real, or not fighting in Iraq. Please do not twist things, Westpoint23.


Good, we’ll clear that up right now, according to you does Zarqawi exist and is he fighting in Iraq?

[edit on 23-4-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:10 PM
link   
The pentagon conducted a propaganda campaign to magnify the role of the leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq.

Who is having problems believing this to be true? Step up.

Who can trust an organisation who admit to magnifying information to make out the target is far worse than they actually are.

Typical spin to settle the minds of those who are simply numbers making up the majority.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Some people just don't want to give up the belief in a lie, even when the liar admits it's a lie. I guess it's because they've either invested too much in the lie themselves, or just don't want the government that they've been told their whole lives to believe gives them a reason not to.

It's a little sad really, but I'm willing to bet that if the administration came out tomorrow and said they blew up the towers, half the population would still be on their side.


Way above. Have my vote.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan


Boogeymen aren't real. UBL is very real.
Ask him. He'll tell ya' that he's 'the man'.
Ask the relatives of the 3,000 dead 9/11 victims.
They'll tell ya. Unlike the boogeyman, UBL is real.
AND he bites!


So because Bin Laden says 'he's the man' I should believe that should I?

How real is he as a conspirating threat rather than a man who verbally wishes alot, urges alot, and claims credit alot?

How real is he as someone who is the puppet master of every suicide bombing in Madrid, London, Bali. How real is that?

How real is it that Bin Laden claims his involvement to make himself look like the man?

How real is it that men in caves are running a worldwide terror network conspiracy?

How real is it that Bush said he does not care where Bin Laden is?

Ask the relatives of the September 11th 2001 victims what they think of that statement by Bush.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Links
Who can trust an organisation who admit to magnifying information to make out the target is far worse than they actually are.


Trust? Trust is irrelevant, what is relevant is the fact that in this forum no one has presented any evidence showing Zarqawi is not real. The article does not state such.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
There are other sources concerning Zarqawi that do not come from the Pentagon.


Just because they weren't announced by the Pentagon doesn't mean they weren't bought and paid for by the Pentagon. I'm not saying they are, but if the articles in this thread are anything to go by then you, me, or anyone else really can't say anything for certain.


Originally posted by WestPoint23
Besides, they did not fabricate the fact that he is real and that he is fighting in Iraq. When you have evidence that the Pentagon did, then come and let me know.


I didn't say that they fabricated that he is real or whether he is fighting in Iraq, I didn't say I had any conclusive evidence of anything of the sort either.


Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by Code_Burger
Notice I haven't once said, anywhere, that Zarqawi is not real, or not fighting in Iraq. Please do not twist things, Westpoint23.


Good, we’ll clear that up right now, according to you does Zarqawi exist and is he fighting in Iraq?

[edit on 23-4-2006 by WestPoint23]


See?

Could you please stop putting words into my mouth that I didn't say (or type), and could you please stop #ing twisting the things that I actually did say. "According to me", I don't know if Zarqawi is real, in Iraq, or any kind of threat to anyone at all, and neither do you. That's what this whole argument is about, remember? Have you cracked your head open recently or something?

[edit on 23-4-2006 by Code_Burger]



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   
what is relevant is the fact that in this forum no one has presented any evidence showing Zarqawi is not real.

That is indeed relevant if somebody claims Zarquawi is not real, i don't hear such claim.

I did here the pentagon making him out to be worse than he actually is, and i'm sure that is what this thread is about.



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:45 PM
link   
OMG our government is involved in propaganda!


FWIW I quit believing in our government and their propaganda back during Vietnam.

Welcom back sister!



posted on Apr, 23 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Links
what is relevant is the fact that in this forum no one has presented any evidence showing Zarqawi is not real.

That is indeed relevant if somebody claims Zarquawi is not real, i don't hear such claim.

I did here the pentagon making him out to be worse than he actually is, and i'm sure that is what this thread is about.




The point that I think is trying to be made is that if the military shows such agility at the fabrication of a story on the man (Zarquawi) that you get to the point where you wonder what is true, what is not true. As this of course can be applied to almost any situation, you wonder where does it end. What you must realize is that this Washington Post article has undermined the credibility and the sheer lack of consideration exhibited by the Pentagon. As I don't think everyone who responded to Syria's post is as firm in the belief that Zarquawi does not exist (as I understood it), I do find that the questioning raised is in fact quite valid. As someone mentioned about mommy and daddy with the Easter Bunny and Santa, I personally did ask myself when I made the harsh discovery that they do not exist, "well, what else is not real." We don't know if Zarqawi in fact exists, if the one that told us he is exists in the first place also is the same that tells us lies about his character. If he exists, yeah, he's a bad guy, but does he?

It is human nature that when we are lied to by a figure that is supposed to be credible, that we will question the credibility of every aspect, not just the one that is known to be a lie. If you caught your spouse lying to you about money, would you be able to believe her as easily when she says she never cheated on you? It all comes to question. That's the bottom line.


note: After reading this over, it seemed like the grammar was quite wrong, but I ran it through Word's Grammatic to make sure. Still don't like the form, but I wanted to add my 2 cents.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join