Author: Obama Administration involved in a Soviet-style disinformation campaign

[Katzndogz]

I would not believe a single word that comes out of this regime. The first assumption is they are lying. This is the regime that gave us the fake story about Benghazi and global warming.

 

[P@triot]

Disinformation that Republicans love:

Except that even MSNBC acknowledged that large cache's of WMD's (specifically chemical weapons) were in fact found in Iraq [MENTION=45917]KNB[/MENTION]. It's ok though KNB - don't feel bad. We've come to expect blind ignorance from you Dumbocrats. Since you never leave your left-wing propaganda "comfort food" websites, we honestly don't expect you to be informed or aware of what is actually happening in the world.

However, for anyone on this site who is not a left-wing partisan hack, please enjoy these facts below which were so undeniable, even MSNBC was forced to report on them eek:

From Chuck Pfarerr's book, Seal Target: Geronimo

It is a chilling fact that thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq. These weapons have been used by Al Qaeda against coalition and NATO forces on dozens of occasions. This has been confirmed by countless sources, most recently in the released WikiLeaks cables.

So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?

The Republicans won’t touch this because it would reveal the incompetence of the Bush administration in failing to neutralize the danger of Iraqi WMD (instead of preventing Weapons of Mass Destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq has accelerated the acquisition, manufacture, and use of chemical weapons by Al Qaeda). The Democrats won’t touch it because it would show President Bush was right to invade Iraq in the first place. It is an axis of embarrassment. And the press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's. The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time.

Sarin-loaded bomb explodes in Iraq - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq | NBC News

NewsMax Archives

*Note that I have 4 sources here all confirming the same information - two links to major news outlets - including one which is a radical left-wing propaganda machine for the Dumbocrats - plus I cited a book with the exact title and author and that book cites the WikiLeaks cables which are classified government documents.

Game. Set. Match, junior.....

Are you kidding? Did you even read that article?

Field-test results could be in error
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the results were from a field test, which can be imperfect, and more analysis needed to be done. “We have to be careful,” he told an audience in Washington Monday afternoon.

Rumsfeld said it may take some time to determine precisely what the chemical was.

Two former weapons inspectors — Hans Blix and David Kay — said the shell was likely a stray weapon that had been scavenged by militants and did not signify that Iraq had large stockpiles of such weapons.

Kimmitt said he believed that insurgents who planted the explosive didn’t know it contained the nerve agent.

‘Very small dispersal’
He said the bomb exploded “a couple of days ago” in the Iraqi capital and resulted in “very small dispersal” of the nerve agent.

“The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found,” said Kimmitt, the chief military spokesman in Iraq. “The round had been rigged as an IED [improvised explosive device] which was discovered by a U.S. force convoy.
Sarin-loaded bomb explodes in Iraq - World news - Mideast/N. Africa - Conflict in Iraq | NBC News

No serious injuries, and the terrorists didn't even know what kind of bomb they had. One report. That's ONE instance. Where are all of these other "thousands of cases" where chemical weapons were used against American soldiers?

There is a HUGE difference between chemical weapons being "used against our soldiers" (direct quote from you) thousands of times and what the author said which was "thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq" (again, a direct quote - this time from the author).

It's called reading comprehension my friend.

 

[P@triot]

oh well...glen Beck has achieved more than you so don't be haten and put your claws in
not everyone get their information off the Hufferpufferpost, salon, thinkprogress, etc

You know, there are meds you can take for that problem of yours.

If there was a disinformation campaign...it ain't working. Wasn't there a thread yesterday about Obama's ratings being lower than at any other point in his administration?

Rotty is starting his 40 proof weekend early

Well that's just it CC - "it ain't working" (hence his miserable approval ratings). Thankfully there are enough people (such as Snowden) who are leaking the truth about Obama and his regime.

By the way - I didn't write this article. I simply shared it. If you have to attack the messenger, that pretty much means you can't deny the message...

 

[KNB]

There is a HUGE difference between chemical weapons being "used against our soldiers" (direct quote from you) thousands of times and what the author said which was "thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq" (again, a direct quote - this time from the author).

It's called reading comprehension my friend.

Where were "thousands" of chemical weapons discovered in Iraq? "THOUSANDS" of chemical weapons had been discovered? Where? Why weren't they mentioned in the Duelfer report? Why weren't there any mention of them anywhere? And if there were so many chemical munitions there, why was only one used during the war?
U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD

 

[Clementine]

"Obama Administration involved in a Soviet-style disinformation campaign"

Nope, far from it.

After he launched the Soviet-style AttackWatch to prompt people to report on their friends and neighbors for "thought crimes", this latest is no surprise.

Obama once stated there was too much information out there. He lamented the fact that we have freedom of speech when he addressed some Muslims after the attack on Benghazi. He once whispered that he'd have more flexibility after his next election. He said the good thing about being president is that he can do whatever he wants.

He believes the constitution is already dead. He believes he is the new law. He doesn't need congress. He could care less what the people think. His approval rating is disgraceful. Yes, he believes he has the right to control information just as he believes he can unilaterally decide which laws he wants to obey or not. He has the mindset of a dictator and that is undeniable.

It is clear from his own words and actions in the past that he would like to control the flow of information and actually doing that is the logical next step. Face it, he would like to silence all opposition. The media and fellow liberals have tried their best by tossing out accusations of racism when anyone dares to disagree with Obama. That hasn't worked. The media attempt to shape public opinion hasn't had the desired effect. Of course they will only become more desperate and try more radical things to push their propaganda.

You claim it doesn't exist. That means you are either a radical who supports this sort of government tampering with information or you are one who believes whatever the left tells you to. The typical commie view is that the end justifies the means. That is what we are seeing here. Don't even try to claim that the far left isn't hellbent to make their agenda a reality and they will do anything to make that happen.

Human nature hasn't changed since the beginning of time. Anything that happened in the past will definitely happen again given the right circumstances. As I look around and see America in the complacent stage, I know it's ripe for a radical takeover, just as virtually every other country in history. Deny all you want, but things are getting worse in this country. Middle class is under assault by this administration.

Yes, dictators are alive and well and they want to rule their own countries. They are arrogant narcissists who want the glory that assholes like Chavez and Castro enjoyed. It's not about the people and never was. They know that to gain power, people must be convinced that what they are doing is for the greater good. Once all the power is ceded to the tyrant, it's all over until the people eventually strengthen and revolt.

Know history and you can understand what is coming in the future. It repeats constantly because even though one generation learns their lesson, future generations eventually become complacent again.

It's not about tin foil hats and crazy conspiracy theories. It's about understanding the signs present in the past as countries took a turn toward ruin and recognizing the same today. Only the ignorant don't see it. That is why it happens over and over. Those who warn others of the familiar pattern they see are quickly ridiculed and we've seen Obama and the Dems do that. We also see their trained followers repeating the insults. It's easier to jump on the bandwagon and insult those who speak the ugly truth than it is to join them and risk speaking out against a big, powerful government.

Government no longer serves us. More and more, we fear government and that is called tyranny.

 

[Kosh]

There is a HUGE difference between chemical weapons being "used against our soldiers" (direct quote from you) thousands of times and what the author said which was "thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq" (again, a direct quote - this time from the author).

It's called reading comprehension my friend.

Where were "thousands" of chemical weapons discovered in Iraq? "THOUSANDS" of chemical weapons had been discovered? Where? Why weren't they mentioned in the Duelfer report? Why weren't there any mention of them anywhere? And if there were so many chemical munitions there, why was only one used during the war?
U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD

Proof that reading comprehension is not your strong point.

 

[KNB]

One guy wrote a book that says there were "thousands" of chemical weapons found in Iraq so it must be true, even though there's nothing about that in the National Security Archives.

 

[Londoner]

No real shock here though as the left has always been about lies. In fact, the Nazis studied Woodrow Wilson to master propagand...

The danger of disinformation is that it comes from within, which disrupts cultural norms and trust in a way that is irreparable. During the Cold War, the Soviets worked to infiltrate ‘trusted’ sources around the world to begin to plant those seeds of doubt.

“The worst harm is implanting false ideas. You implant doubt, cause people to question their values, their beliefs by tearing down Western values, you create a vacuum that allows Marxist thought to expand,” Rychlak told Glenn. “When you know it is coming from your enemy, you don’t trust it. If they can get it to come from the United States, if it comes from Washington, if it comes from The New York Times or one of those sources, people tended to believe it. We are starting to be suspicious of those [sources] today, but they tried to intentionally implant false ideas into trusted sources [at the time].”

Author explains how the Obama Administration is involved in a Soviet-style disinformation campaign

I have no doubt that Obama has lied about a lot of things, but it would help if you could provide hard, actionable proof of those lies? Sourcing Glenn Beck is as ridiculous as me linking this: List Of George W. Bush Lies You're just bringing spam to this forum.

Do some heavy lifting and show us exactly where/how Obama lied - and not just where the Republican propaganda machine says he lied, which isn't news because talk radio has been generating these stories every day since he announced his presidency. Michael Savage - who I actually find entertaining - often claimed that Obama was a Muslim Agent, and literally working directly under the leadership of Jihadists. He also implied Obama was secretly helping Mexicans run drugs into white neighborhoods so as to pollute the minds of white children. I find this shit is hilarious, which is why I listen to people like Savage and Levine on my long commute. But it scares me when I discover people who actually believe this stuff.

On the other hand, I agree with your basic suspicion. Whether it be Iran-Contra, Whitewater, Benghazi or the intelligence surrounding the Iraq War, one thing is certain - presidents lie or distort or omit or cherry pick facts to suit their agenda, sometimes for good reason (-I'm thinking of Eisenhower's ant-communist propaganda during the Cold War, some of it useful, IMO. Check out this [ame="http://www.amazon.com/Total-Cold-War-Eisenhowers-Propaganda/dp/0700615903"]book[/ame], which is exhaustively sourced to declassified government documents).

But make no mistake, the lying starts with campaign promises and doesn't end until after they've typed the last sentence of their autobiography. And they always have a group of useful-idiots who defend them or believe in them. I find it shocking to see morons fawning over Reagan, and equally shocking to watch people quiver and swoon over Obama's quasi-messianic Hope garbage in 2008. (There are places in the deep south where people literally masturbate to Reagan's greatness, a politician)

Lastly, by assuming that only one side lies, you are presupposing that the other side is honest. It means that you trust your "Dear Leaders". (Again. Please be careful with your news sources. Glen Beck, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh, Keith Olbermann, Rachel Madow... these people are for entertainment.)

Also, your reference about disinformation, while true, is extremely limited. Every nation manipulates information, not just the fucking commies and fascists. Have you ever taken a poly sci course or studied this stuff? Are you familiar with COINTELPRO? especially in the 50s. This stuff is on the record and not in dispute by any party. You don't want Glen Beck to turn you into a victim of disinformation. Broaden your information sources.

 

[william the wie]

If you like your policy you can keep.

You can keep your physician

You will save money with ACA

Are those three sufficient?

 

[candycorn]

You know, there are meds you can take for that problem of yours.

If there was a disinformation campaign...it ain't working. Wasn't there a thread yesterday about Obama's ratings being lower than at any other point in his administration?

Rotty is starting his 40 proof weekend early

Well that's just it CC - "it ain't working" (hence his miserable approval ratings). Thankfully there are enough people (such as Snowden) who are leaking the truth about Obama and his regime.

By the way - I didn't write this article. I simply shared it. If you have to attack the messenger, that pretty much means you can't deny the message...

Both you and your source are full of shit (as always). Glen Beck?

 

[P@triot]

There is a HUGE difference between chemical weapons being "used against our soldiers" (direct quote from you) thousands of times and what the author said which was "thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq" (again, a direct quote - this time from the author).

It's called reading comprehension my friend.

Where were "thousands" of chemical weapons discovered in Iraq? "THOUSANDS" of chemical weapons had been discovered? Where? Why weren't they mentioned in the Duelfer report? Why weren't there any mention of them anywhere? And if there were so many chemical munitions there, why was only one used during the war?
U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD

You keep saying "where" when you've been told "where" - in Iraq.

Then you ask "why" there is no mention - the author explained that already (again - reading comprehension).

The leaked cables by WikiLeaks proves you are wrong. The author (a former Navy Seal with classified clearance and friends still on the ground in Iraq) corroborates the top secret government cables (which require no corroboration) and MSNBC corroborates him even further.

Your inability to accept reality due to your inability to admit you're wrong because of your ego is not my problem. I'm sorry that Bush was right and that causes you great distress. I am. But the facts are the facts. They are all there in black & white. Four sources - one the most reliable and indisputable (top secret government cables which you were never intended to see) and one is even the radical left-wing propaganda arm of the Dumbocrats.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[KNB]

"In Iraq" is not an answer. Cite the Wikileaks cables. Where on all of the internet is a single documented report about "thousands" of WMD being found in Iraq?

 

[P@triot]

One guy wrote a book that says there were "thousands" of chemical weapons found in Iraq so it must be true, even though there's nothing about that in the National Security Archives.

Even though there are volumes of information about it in the leaked WikiLeaks cables.

The truth is KNB - you don't want to know the truth. You prefer the Dumbocrat version of "reality" which is spoon fed to you by Obama and the liberal media. You could go read the WikiLeaks cables - they are still out there. You choose not to.

By the way, it wasn't "one man". Even MSNBC reported on the chemical weapons. And chemical weapons are WMD's.

 

[KNB]

One link. Just put up one credible link to the specific Wikileaks cables which say that stockpiles of "thousands" of chemical weapons were captured in Iraq.

You're lying out of your asshole because the Bush administration would have been jumping for fucking joy at being vindicated by the discovery of "thousands" of chemical weapons in Iraq.

 

[P@triot]

"In Iraq" is not an answer. Cite the Wikileaks cables. Where on all of the internet is a single documented report about "thousands" of WMD being found in Iraq?

It's not? What is an answer in your desperate mind?

 

[P@triot]

One link. Just put up one credible link to the specific Wikileaks cables which say that stockpiles of "thousands" of chemical weapons were captured in Iraq.

LMAO! I've already put up four citations. You've chosen to ignore all of them. I even added a link to MSNBC which you tried to discredit.

Are you really so lazy and/or incompetent that you can't locate the WikiLeaks cables? You're incapable of entering the known URL or using Google?

 

[KNB]

You've put up four citations to the same bullshit. If Iraq had so many "thousands" of chemical munitions, then why were so few used during the war? And according to those wikileaks cables and every other government report, most of the rounds that were discovered were leftover from before the 1991 Gulf War (from the 1980s, guess who was supporting Saddam Hussein in the 1980s) not in weapon-ready condition and did not pose an "imminent threat" like the Bush administration said.

There was nothing in Iraq that posed a threat to the United States of America.

 

[Stephanie]

the article is from glen beck... lmao...

the "author" is Ron Rychlak who should probably stick to writing about the wonders of the papacy

oh well...glen Beck has achieved more than you so don't be haten and put your claws in
not everyone get their information off the Hufferpufferpost, salon, thinkprogress, etc

You know, there are meds you can take for that problem of yours.

what a loser troll
who's head is stuck up where the sun the doesn't shine and it stinks

 

[P@triot]

You've put up four citations to the same bullshit. If Iraq had so many "thousands" of chemical munitions, then why were so few used during the war? And according to those wikileaks cables and every other government report, most of the rounds that were discovered were leftover from before the 1991 Gulf War (from the 1980s, guess who was supporting Saddam Hussein in the 1980s) not in weapon-ready condition and did not pose an "imminent threat" like the Bush administration said.

There was nothing in Iraq that posed a threat to the United States of America.

Ah! So now we're going with a new narrative. As the indisputable evidence continues to mount, KNB is suddenly going from "there were no WMD's" to "nothing posed a threat to the U.S.".

Just can't be a mature adult and admit you were wrong, can you?

 

[P@triot]

But WikiLeaks’ newly-released Iraq war documents reveal that for years afterward, U.S. troops continued to find chemical weapons labs, encounter insurgent specialists in toxins and uncover weapons of mass destruction.

But even late in the war, WMDs were still being unearthed. In the summer of 2008, according to one WikiLeaked report, American troops found at least 10 rounds that tested positive for chemical agents. “These rounds were most likely left over from the [Saddam]-era regime. Based on location, these rounds may be an AQI [Al Qaeda in Iraq] cache.

WikiLeaks Show WMD Hunt Continued in Iraq - With Surprising Results | Danger Room | Wired.com