Egypt 'Revolution'- all the way to Libya 'War'

[bostonterrierowner]

This Mick Deane fellow reminds me of Rodney Dangerfield

[Flabbergasted]

A video purporting to show a crisis actor session in Egypt. It looks like a "staged bust" to me. Or an advertising gimmick for screencast-o-matic.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpmFIWm1dWw

[anonjedi2]

This video was already posted, please review previous posts before posting duplicates.

Personally, I believe this leak is too convenient and it might actually be a psyop within a psyop.

[Flabbergasted]

This video was already posted, please review previous posts before posting duplicates.

Personally, I believe this leak is too convenient and it might actually be a psyop within a psyop.

Sorry, I must have missed it earlier. The posting date seemed so recent I didn't do a thorough check.
Yes, it looks like a simulation of a simulation.

[simonshack]

In the Arab world, it’s something of a phenomenon. It has a name: ‘Taharrush gamea’. Sometimes the girls are teased and have their veils torn off by gangs of young men; sometimes it escalates into rape. Five years ago, this form of attack was the subject of an award-winning Egyptian film, 678. Instances of young men surrounding and attacking girls were reported throughout the Arab Spring protests in Cairo in 2011 and 2012. Lara Logan, a CNN CBS journalist covering the fall of Hosni Mubarak, was raped in Tahrir Square. Taharrush gamea is a modern evil, and it’s being imported into Europe. Our authorities ought to be aware of it.

Here we have a direct link to a CNN CBS journalist, Lara Logan and an "award winning" film. According to the Spectator their statement "who has ever heard of such a thing?" is immediately followed up with examples from the West-instigated destruction of Egypt from years ago. This "Taharrush gamea" has now, apparently, been "imported" into Europe according to the media.

The media is having a field day with the multicultural topic, post New Year's Eve, and no-one here, on this thread, has even bothered to bring it up in context with media fakery and have a good, long, hard look at it with a critical eye.

I'm quoting Apache's post from the currently locked "Multicultural Agenda" thread - as I happened to bump today into CBS's "60-minutes" episode featuring Lara Logan ("Chief foreign affairs correspondent for CBS News") reciting her "public gang-rape in Tahrir square" fantasy spiel. Grab your barf bags and watch it all - for this imbecilic 'news story' certainly belongs to the very top of the "Hall of Shame" of media fakery.

"On 15 February 2011, CBS News released a statement that Logan had been beaten and sexually assaulted on 11 February, while covering the celebrations in Tahrir Square following Hosni Mubarak's resignation. CBS 60 Minutes broadcast an interview with her about it on 1 May 2011; she said she was speaking out because of the prevalence of sexual assault in Egypt, and to break the silence about the sexual violence women reporters are reluctant to report in case it prevents them from doing their jobs.

She said the incident involved 200–300 men and lasted around 25 minutes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_Logan

No kidding. "200-300 men".


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0KmEaWsSQw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0KmEaWsSQw



There is something so unspeakably revolting about this, something so beyond depravity, that the human brain recoils. As much as I hate losing my self-control and indulging in emotional 'hate speech' / violent threats / subversive thoughts, I can't help but feeling that a just and due punishment for this callous, white South African liar / media bitch would be to submit her - for real, this time - to the very ordeal she describes, hard-whipping sticks / flagpoles and all. Alternatively, nuking the CBS headquarters would seem to be in order. Oh, I forgot: 'nukular' weapons are just another pathetic media / military invention...

[Apache]

Thanks Simon. I am going to take a look at the transcript of the interview.

[simonshack]

Thanks Simon. I am going to take a look at the transcript of the interview.

Looking forward to it, Apache.

Make sure you don't miss this painfully surreal / ridiculous line of the pathetic media bitch's recitation :

At 6:20 into the CBS video:
"When I lost Ray ['her badass Special Forces bodyguard'] I thought that was the end. It was like all the adrenalin left my body... coz I knew in his face, when he lost me [???] he thought he'd... I was gonna die."


If I ever bump into whoever wrote this crap around a dark street corner, I can only hope I will manage to keep my adrenalin in check.

[Apache]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/lara-logan- ... o-assault/

I was told later that they were saying "Let's take her pants off." And it's like suddenly, before I even know what's happening, I feel hands grabbing my breasts, grabbing my crotch, grabbing me from behind. I mean - and it's not one person and then it stops - it's like one person and another person and another person.

Logan uses the word person in the above description of her attackers. When talking about the assault in other sections she uses the words people, crowd and mob.

All these words are ambiguous.

When talking about non-attackers she uses the words guys, cameraman, women, men, and soldiers.

All these words are non-ambiguous.

A truthful account does not contain an ambiguous word like person, especially one that is accusing hundreds of men of sexually assaulting and raping someone with their hands.

Nowhere in Logan's account does she ever identify any of her assailants as men. Indeed, she actively avoids stating it.

Person can mean man or woman and by using that word Logan has backed herself into a corner.

By using the word person Logan is admitting that she was unable to solely identify men as her attackers, otherwise she would use the unambiguous word man and not person.

Use of person = credibility of zero.

[Apache]

Lara Logan interview continued…

At the beginning of the interview CBS says -

During the revolution, dozens of reporters were assaulted, often by agents of the regime.

The above is the only statement that CBS makes admitting that the organisation knew that Egypt was dangerous for reporters. In fact, both Logan and CBS were aware of the dangerous nature of reporting on the Egyptian revolution before they went to Tahrir Square on 11 February 2011 and the problem I have with Logan's interview is that not once does she take responsibility for her own decision to report from a dangerous location. Instead, what she does is blame shift.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lara_Logan

Logan and her CBS crew were arrested and detained for one night by the Egyptian Army on 3 February 2011, while covering the Egyptian Revolution. She said the crew was blindfolded and handcuffed at gunpoint, and their driver beaten. They were advised to leave the country, but were later released.[17][18]

Logan says in her interview:

When we drove from the airport into Cairo that night, moments after Mubarak had stepped down, it was unbelievable.

I can only surmise from this that Logan either left Egypt sometime after 3 February and returned on 11 February, or she and her crew were going to leave on 11 February and turned back towards Cairo. Either way, warnings about reporters being attacked in Egypt were quite clear:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/f ... t-protests

Western broadcasters, including ITN and the BBC, today joined the Arabic networks in warning about the running battles taking place in and around Cairo's Tahrir Square.

Reuters said one of its television crews was beaten up early today close to Tahrir Square while filming a piece about shops and banks being forced to shut during the clashes.

Press freedom groups warn that reporting on the Egyptian uprising is becoming increasingly perilous as the number of journalists injured and arrested continues to rise.

Mohamed Abdel Dayem, the Committee to Protect Journalists' Middle East and North Africa programme co-ordinator. "This is like a return to the first phase, before the censorship, but far more violent and universal. They are now targeting anybody with a camera, notepad, anybody interviewing people – anyone will get violently attacked, anyone they could get their hands on. If you're a journalist in Egypt at this late stage in the game, they don't care if you're from Mars – they're going to come after you."

Did the above attacks stop between 3 February and 11 February? I don't know, but I find it highly unlikely. Therefore, Logan and her team knew that Tahrir Square was dangerous for reporters before they went there. Logan says that there was a "party atmosphere" on the night of 11 February 2011 and that may be true, but it is also misleading. What is missing from her interview is she decided to go to Tahrir Square despite already knowing that it was dangerous for reporters to be there. By leaving out this fact (a lie by omission) both Logan and CBS are forwarding an untruthful narrative.

Glenn Greenwald (Jewish, pro-Snowden supporter, but the point is valid) describes exactly what Logan is:

http://www.salon.com/2010/06/28/journalism_9/

they illustrate the two poles of journalism: those who view their role as exposing the relevant secrets of the powerful (Hastings) and those who view their role as protecting those secrets and serving the interests of those officials (Logan).

Logan has done good and courageous reporting over the years, but she clearly sees herself as part of the government and military, rather than an adversarial watchdog over it

The above was written in 2010, long before Logan and CBS went to Tahrir Square. A pro-US government and pro-US military reporter enters a country the US State Department is helping to destroy, ignores warnings about how dangerous Tahrir Square is for journalists, and then acts all surprised when she's attacked in that location. She then blame shifts from herself and onto her attackers, character assassinating all Egyptian men in the process.

On the night of the 11th, a mob turned on Lara and her "60 Minutes" team and singled her out in a violent sexual assault.

If I am told that an area of my town is off limits and I run the risk of being physically attacked if I go there and then I deliberately go there and I'm beaten up, who is going to have any sympathy for me? It would be my own stupid fault. However, if I then add a component to the story that I wasn't merely physically beaten, but I was also sexually assaulted, something no-one else had suffered, then I can blame shift away from my own stupidity and minimise my own responsibility for what subsequently happened.

It is likely, from Logan's language, that she was physically attacked in some manner, but I don't believe her when she says it was also a sexual assault. Not only does Logan fail to personalise her sexual assault and refers to it twice as "the sexual assault" indicating that she is not willing to say "my sexual assault" or "the sexual assault I suffered" or use any personal pronouns in relation to the sexual part of the attack, she also constantly changes tenses, indicating fabrication. She also alleges she was beaten with flag poles and sticks at the same time she was being sexually assaulted. It is hard to imagine that no-one got a broken hand if that were true.

I didn't even know that they were beating me with flagpoles and sticks and things, because I couldn't even feel that. Because I think of the sexual assault, was all I could feel, was their hands raping me over and over and over again.

Which one would you be able to feel the most? Hands (which have somehow made you numb) or being beaten with sticks and poles?

Does Logan show any guilt about her decision to have a dangerous career and place herself in a dangerous location? Only slightly. When talking about being reunited with her children she says:

I felt like I had been given a second chance that I didn't deserve because I did that to them...I came so close to leaving them, to abandoning them.

There is no anger in Logan's voice towards her attackers for very nearly causing her children to lose their mother. "I did that to them" is self blame. The 'leaving' and 'abandonment' guilt in the above statement is in relation to her nearly giving up the fight for her life during the attack, but in what way is being murdered an abandonment of her children? It's not. It is only an abandonment of her children if she knew before she entered Tahrir Square that it was dangerous for her to be there and she willingly put herself at risk.

Well, she did know and she did willingly put herself at risk and any sympathy I might have had for her has evaporated in the light of those facts.

[CluedIn]

Apparently, 4 years later, we are finding out that Ambassador Stevens was not gay as reported (http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/145011/ ... ark-tapson) but was indeed engaged. Her name is Ly-DIE DENIER. She is an actress (admittedly) - played Jane in some Tarzan series abroad. The pictures they are now showing of Ambassador Stevens make him look like an older Justin Bieber (IMO). I have never read he was in a relationship with a woman, let alone engaged. Surprisingly, out of all the days she could have "met" the Ambassador, September 11, 1994 was the day of their 1st meeting. Just to refresh memories, the Ambassador was murdered on September 11, 2012.


full link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQMd8nt1DOs

[kickstones]

3. Who the heck knows what is going on unless we are there!? Al Jazeera is obviously as controlled and financially dependent on its rich benefactors as any TV station in the U.S.A. -- perhaps those benefactors are at every level of control. They populate the political parties of the U.S.A., the people and the news companies.

I cannot see the below linked video elsewhere on the forum so have posted on this thread, the footage (released by Al Jazeera) depicts a ‘bombed hospital’ in the militant-controlled neighborhoods of Syrian city of Aleppo.

http://en.farsnews.com/player.aspx?nn=13950706001386

Look at the “injured” guy on the right:



https://southfront.org/al-jazeera-relea ... rn-aleppo/

psyop within a psyop?