Joseph Goebbels Lives!

[Flanders]

WWII ended in 1945, but former Nazis keep turning up. So how come they cannot find Dr. Joseph Goebbels? I know it was reported that he committed suicide in the fürhrerbunker, but somebody should check the basement in the White House:

It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.

What We Can Learn from Joseph Goebbels
November 26, 2012
By Sara Noble

What We Can Learn from Joseph Goebbels | www.independentsentinel.com

Socialists posing as Democrats failed to control public opinion with the Fairness Doctrine (1949 - 1987) because that form of propaganda was basically censorship in that the economic realities of broadcasting effectively silenced opponents without giving air time to Socialist propaganda. Getting the message out requires a steady hand at the helm:

For decades, a so-called anti-propaganda law prevented the U.S. government's mammoth broadcasting arm from delivering programming to American audiences. But on July 2, that came silently to an end with the implementation of a new reform passed in January. The result: an unleashing of thousands of hours per week of government-funded radio and TV programs for domestic U.S. consumption in a reform initially criticized as a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts. So what just happened?

Until this month, a vast ocean of U.S. programming produced by the Broadcasting Board of Governors such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and the Middle East Broadcasting Networks could only be viewed or listened to at broadcast quality in foreign countries. The programming varies in tone and quality, but its breadth is vast: It's viewed in more than 100 countries in 61 languages.

I know that the public will always fund their government’s propaganda efforts in one form or another. It is safe to assume that “. . . a green light for U.S. domestic propaganda efforts.” will require huge amounts of tax dollars. This latest branch of propaganda notwithstanding, had Goebbels had the level of funding the FCC has the Nazis might be running Europe today.

Socialists were never shy about using many of the same techniques Goebbels pioneered; indoctrinating children, the big lie, and so on. Here are a few samples:

The topics covered include human rights abuses in Iran; self-immolation in Tibet; human trafficking across Asia; and on-the-ground reporting in Egypt and Iraq.

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans
Posted By John Hudson Sunday, July 14, 2013 - 7:06 PM

U.S. Repeals Propaganda Ban, Spreads Government-Made News To Americans | The Cable

Controlling mass communications is essential to propaganda efforts aimed at adults. Does anyone want to deny that America’s government/press partnership is employing the modus operandi laid out by Goebbels?

Government controls the press in this country as surely as it did in Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Communist China, Cuba, etc. It is only a matter of which ideology is being promoted by the government at any given time. For most of my life it has been big government socialism. Just think how obsolete the liberal agenda would be if the press was not so biased!

War

The propaganda coming America’s way will be designed to transform Socialist touchy-feely foreign policy into a moral crusade justifying military interventions under the UN’s control. In plain English choose sides in civil wars. The American people will not be polled to find out if they think a United Nations military intervention is popular or unpopular. Here’s why Americans asking the question should be important:

During the Iraq War the phrase “increasingly unpopular war” was spoken by talking heads and Democrats more times than I can count. They never explained why a war of self-defense was becoming increasingly unpopular? The question was never asked because of the spin the liberal mainstream media puts on its coverage. A number of Americans were turned against a war of self-defense because of the press. The media, including conservative word smiths who should know better, repeatedly said the war in Iraq was unpopular when it was only unpopular to UN-loving Democrats.

NOTE: Bush the Younger was defending the country when leading Democrats and their media stooges wanted to run to the United Nations. They still want to run; only now they are running out of Iraq and Afghanistan.

In any event, it is ludicrous to qualify wars by their popularity. Just and unjust is another trick designate. Was Clinton’s Balkan Adventure popular? Unpopular? Was Clinton’s Balkan Adventure just or unjust? Was it even a war? The record shows it was nothing more than killing Christians to help Muslims.

There is only one question to ask when the country is threatened and/or attacked: Is a military response self-defense? If the country is not threatened and/or attacked there is no justification for the use of military force.

NOTE: “Threatened” does not include the philosophical crapola the new section over at the Ministry of Propaganda is formulating as I speak. Bottom line: No American should die fighting in a foreign land so that others might live.

Islam attacked the US on 9/11/2001 yet the war in Iraq became “increasingly unpopular” according to the liberal spin machine. Interestingly, Goebbels never did tell Hitler that LOSING the war was becoming increasingly unpopular. This satire shows how Goebbels’ propaganda kept Hitler in the dark until the very end:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSD0Mjt64LQ&feature=player_embedded]Hitler Is Informed His Pizza Will Arrive Late - YouTube[/ame]​

To me, there is no such thing as a popular or an unpopular war. The term “acceptable war” would better serve the American people. Imagine media liberals dealing with that definition!

If the term unpopular must be used, then the MSM should define “popular war” in the interest of balanced reporting. The press can’t do that because it would then have to define self-defense.

Propagandists latched onto “unpopular” as though it is God’s favorite word. They are never asked to define a popular war. One answer to the question depends upon when it is asked. Even the MSM would have to admit that winning is popular to the winners after the fact. A second answer depends upon who answers. I doubt if anyone who was killed or wounded fighting a war would say that it was a popular, or an unpopular, war. I think they would be more concerned with sacrificing themselves in vain.

Allow me to throw some manure into the game and look at wars using popular as well as unpopular to describe them:

If the American Revolution is not the most popular war of all time to Americans it should be. Conversely, it has to be the most unpopular war of all time to the British.

The Civil War was popular to some and unpopular to others while it was being fought. Nothing changed after it was over.

World War One is not taught as much as is the Civil War. WWI was unpopular while it was being fought. WWI became marginally popular in story and song after the Armistice. Today, WWI must be designated unpopular as its tragic consequences continue to multiply.

World War Two was an acceptable, and necessary, war because Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. WWII was Hollywood’s most profitable war of all time; hence, it was an exceptionally popular war to storytellers. I don’t know that the Americans who fought that war ever saw it as popular. WWII is acclaimed by liberals because Soviet communism was rescued. Helping communism is always popular to the Left. Fighting against communism is always unpopular to the Left.

Korea was neither popular nor unpopular. Truman did good by using the UN to stop Communist expansion. Truman also did great harm because he only acted after the UN Security Council gave him an opening. Truman unwittingly set a terrible precedent by giving the impression that the UN had a say in America’s affairs.

Vietnam was unpopular to American Communists while it was being fought. Vietnam became unpopular to many, but not to everyone, after defeat. Had America won in Vietnam the popularity tally would be reversed.

Will anyone in the press stop referring to wars as popular or unpopular? You know they won’t because the Left is laying down the preliminary propaganda for “popular” touch-feely military interventions. Military interventions should not be confused with wars.

Unfortunately, tragedies are part of every war even the just ones. Still, Americans have much to be thankful for. Not the least of their blessings is the fact that neither Clinton or Carter was president on 9/11/2001.

 

[Sallow]

Unfortunately, tragedies are part of every war even the just ones. Still, Americans have much to be thankful for. Not the least of their blessings is the fact that neither Clinton or Carter was president on 9/11/2001.[/B]

We weren't thankful for that in New York.

Because had that been the case, 9/11 might not have happened.

As for the rest of your rant..you folks are much more closer to Nazis then the people you complain about.

 

[dilloduck]

Unfortunately, tragedies are part of every war even the just ones. Still, Americans have much to be thankful for. Not the least of their blessings is the fact that neither Clinton or Carter was president on 9/11/2001.[/B]

We weren't thankful for that in New York.

Because had that been the case, 9/11 might not have happened.

As for the rest of your rant..you folks are much more closer to Nazis then the people you complain about.

Claiming that Carter or Clinton might have stopped 9/11 is a good one. Explain to me how they woulda pulled that of.

 

[Katzndogz]

There is no way to tell what's true from the media any longer. Government propaganda will soon be all you hear. Perhaps foreign news sources will be a viable place to find out what's really happening. Pravda is more reliable than the New York Times.

 

[dilloduck]

There is no way to tell what's true from the media any longer. Government propaganda will soon be all you hear. Perhaps foreign news sources will be a viable place to find out what's really happening. Pravda is more reliable than the New York Times.

We're at war. We'll hear less and less all the time. Control over the internet with be the death blow.

 

[regent]

Can the American people, or any population for that matter, be educated to recognize the propaganda that is not in their best interests? With all of the advertising that is done in America one would think we'd be pretty immune, but not so. In fact, we seem to be even more gullible today to propaganda than ever. I wonder if any studies bear out that premise?
Can the average person be taught to analyze propaganda and recognize some of the more shoddy efforts?

 

[Flanders]

Unfortunately, tragedies are part of every war even the just ones. Still, Americans have much to be thankful for. Not the least of their blessings is the fact that neither Clinton or Carter was president on 9/11/2001.[/B]

We weren't thankful for that in New York.

Because had that been the case, 9/11 might not have happened.

As for the rest of your rant..you folks are much more closer to Nazis then the people you complain about.

Claiming that Carter or Clinton might have stopped 9/11 is a good one. Explain to me how they woulda pulled that of.

To Sallow: Jamie Gorelick’s infamous memo did more to insure the successful attacks on 9-11-2001 than did any other single act. Should you explain to dilloduck be sure to explain this as well:

As Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton from 1994 to 1997 Gorelick wrote the memo that created the now infamous “Gorelick Wall.” A 1995 memo she wrote, stated explicitly that they would “go beyond what is legally required, [to] prevent any risk of creating an unwarranted appearance that FISA is being used to avoid procedural safeguards which would apply in a criminal investigation.” These rules were, shortly after their creation, expanded to regulate such communications in future counter-terrorism investigations. It set a procedure where various intelligence operations such as the FBI and CIA could not share information with each other.

Jamie Gorelick’s “wall” barred anti-terror investigators from accessing the computer of Zacarias Moussaoui, the 20th hijacker, already in custody on an immigration violation shortly before 9/11.
At the time, an enraged FBI investigator wrote a prophetic memo to headquarters about the wall

‘Whatever has happened to this — someday someone will die — and wall or not — the public will not understand why we were not more effective in throwing every resource we had at certain problems…..especially since the biggest threat to us UBL [Usama bin Laden], is getting the most protection.

Jamie Gorelick’s Incompetence Helped Cause 9/11 AND the Housing Collapse” Why is She on Obama’s Short List for FBI Director ?
by Jeff Dunetz
Posted on March 25 2011 5:30 pm

Jamie Gorelick?s Incompetence Helped Cause 9/11 AND the Housing Collapse? Why is She on Obama?s Short List for FBI Director ? | NewsReal Blog

 

[cathycollie]

I think his new name is O'mara.

 

[whitehall]

If Goebbels was still alive he would probably easy to find. He would be the oldest man in the world at about 116 years old.

 

[Flanders]

If Goebbels was still alive he would probably easy to find. He would be the oldest man in the world at about 116 years old.

To whitehall: I predict he will live as long as government propaganda lives.

 

[Flanders]

Here’s an update. Click on the link to view a video of Michael Evens:

New law 'allows Obama to take over all media'
'Your government is acting in open, undeclared, but blatant treason'
Published: 11 hours ago
JOE KOVACS

New law ?allows Obama to take over all media?