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

[warriorhun]

Dear fbenario,

you say:

Your logic may tell you that, but even after repeating your theory WAY too many times, you still haven't posted any evidence at all supporting it. If you actually do understand that this Arab crap is just another American foreign-policy evil manipulation, then stop referring to it as democracy.
Please stop burdening us with you beloved CoAD theory about democracy until you show real evidence. Please.

No, it is exporting democracy. Democracy as in Iraq, not as in ancient Athens. Democracy had a meaning in ancient Athens, it has no meaning today, except as a code-word. As your faked representatives elected via faked elections are strawmans and the world is governed through the monetary system, demoracy does not mean a thing in America, too.

So, I call it iraqi democracy exported, you call it American foreign policy manipulation. What is the difference?

Evidences of CoAD-plan so far:

Now, first I wrote a long one, but I cut it short.

1. 2003 war plans angainst Iran and Syria to export democracy.
2. Wikileaks (Mossad) involvement
3. Massive media fakery used to sell the story to the West and to incite the Arabs to revolt
4. Social Media (Facebook, etc...) manipulations by agent provocateurs
5. Iran and Syria counter-intelligence activity
6. Tunisian and Egyptian second line of party/army co-operating, promising elections, as if the protests won: welcome to democracy.
7. Libyan faked massacres as alibi to planned invasion to liberate and bring democracy
8. "Al-Qaeda"-Mistaravim message to Egypt, 2Al-Qaeda"-Mistaravim being mentioned by Gadhaffi as the force behind fightings in Libya.

Sorry, I can not provide no supporting documentation with Obama's signature on it. If you have a better theory, share with me by all means, please.

[gwynned]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCMpXYdaXAM

In this video, rebels go to extremes and use chalk to white out Qadaffi flag. Things are getting hot there!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCMpXYdaXAM

[nonhocapito]

Dear Warriorhun, I see that your expectations in terms of fakery are generally well-founded but I just need to share with you the following totally partial and totally personal impression: I think that sometimes you call "fakery" too soon on too many details.
I wish you came with just one or two really unquestionable clues, instead than too many clues that are bound to be felt as exaggerations or distortions, especially to the new user. I noticed this in the past with your research on other events, like the Giffords story.
Consider that in Libya, as I said elsewhere, there might actually be some action going on on the territory, in order to cause consistent response from the Libyan army: maybe we have Xe mercenaries or Mossad masked as insurgency or I don't know what. It is still fakery, but maybe not everything we are showed is generated on a computer.
But even if: even if everything in these pictures is faked, and you are being correct with all the items you present (and you can very well be), the clues are still not good enough. Again, totally personal feeling, here, and maybe I am being a dick, I don't know. It's just that this is not 2001 anymore and I don't think errors in the compositions are bound to come in so large numbers. I won't go into the details you want us to consider, but not because they are incontrovertible. Just know that in the last picture you presented here, the car not having a plate is the only clue I find interesting.

[warriorhun]

Dear nonhocapito and All,

I admit I like poetic exaggeration to show my point.

Of course, there is a destabilization project going on in Libya, fighting, army versus Blackwater or Mossad or western recon units-backed local insurgents from tribal enemies of Gaddhafi's tribe, or Libyan immigrants returning (as they did in Iraq), or whoever. But why on Earth would they show us on the Media what is happening?

I will take now a bold logical leap. All images from Libya are faked. All Libyan imagery are CGI imagery.
Why, you may ask.

1. If I were Gaddhafi, I would not let in a single Western reporter into my country in such situation. In Gaddhafi's place I would close the borders and apply martial law.
2. If I were a Western reporter, I would not go to a country where Arabs are killing each other in big numbers. Bullets see no color, and you can not stay in the Tripoli Hilton, so it is too dangerous.
3. When you travelled Libya, you had an official Libyan guide, no? With an official Libyan guide, a reporter may not get close to the frontline, let alone insurgents. He may not watch massacres or graves. If he does and get caught, he will be sent home asap if he is lucky, because in most places of the world, "reporter" reads "spy". If he sneaked in-country without an official Libyan guide, he will be treated as spy.
4. The Western recon units, SAS, Blackwater, Mossad or the like, who may help the fighting, will not let a reporter with them to take pictures on a secret operation. No evidence is the whole point of a secret operation, if you take pictures and get caught, the enemy may analyse them and gain info. In real life, those "Benghazi rebels pictures" if they were not fake, would be a goldmine to the Libyan intelligence. Answers to questions like: what arms and equipment do they have and in what condition, what uniforms do they wear, are they well fed and well rested, are they an un-kempt rag-tag bunch or disciplined and their officers take hygiene seriously, are they in good morals? Where are they located? And they can look for familiar faces, and maybe some of those familiar faces have a few relatives in Tripoli to invite in for a little "questioning"... We are talking about life and death here, about war and decisive informations, not some child game! And, of course, if Gaddhafi wins, all those who are toting guns on the rebel pictures would be hanged so they would not allow pictures to be taken, if they were not sims in reality.
5. Therefore, I claim, there are no Western reporters on either side in Libya who may be taking pictures. That means, if they want pictures, they have to fake them on computer.
6. All images I saw far seem to be made with the same program. All the pictures I posted here.The backgrounds, the depth, the angle and size discrepancies, faces and body parts of the people, etc... Actually, there are so much laughable images that I really have to show restraint in posting them here. I am still waiting for at least one credible image to emerge from Libya. Have you seen one so far? I bet you have not.

That is why I say what we see on Media about Libya is totally faked, and we can speculate only what is going on: and the speculations must be based on logic and not faked imagery.

[hoi.polloi]

My personal sense right now is that 'fakery' is being called on too many images, indeed. Although we have every right to discard the imagery as fake, given the time period we are in, it is definitely getting a bit more surreal to nitpick the news which has an increasingly seamless blend of real and fake elements.

In other words, I wouldn't remove any of those comments, but at this point I would question the usefulness of repeating our doubt in the modern imagery over and over unless we see something extremely striking.

It has been almost ten years since 9/11, and over 40 years since NASA faked the moon landings. The most technologically advanced fakery has surpassed our ability to sort out the difference between reality and fiction, based solely on the simulacrum - images (moving and still), audio, articles.

Keep at it, but let's try to find the most egregious examples. Otherwise, we could quickly fill this forum with every single news article released from any of the propaganda venues and overwhelm people. The trick is to keep things simple - is something impossible versus unlikely and/or unbelievable?

[warriorhun]

Dear hoi.polloi,

you want something outrageous and impossible, something totally un-believable? Ok, I show restraint and post only one image from the millions.
It is Bahrain. Secular liberal democracy is not established there yet, that is why they are protesting in the first place.

Okay, the image:


Now, enter into google something like "bahrain women dress code". For me the first link which came up was this: http://www.asiarooms.com/en/travel-guid ... t%27s.html
Let me quote from this simple 2011 "Bahrain dos and don'ts" advice for tourists:

The women wear loose clothes that cover their hair, arms and legs...
However, modern western outfits like spaghetti tops or tops with deep necklines are not permitted. Women can choose from the half sleeves to the full sleeve tops.

So, in real life, the two girls would be raped and stoned to death, period.
Impossible image enough?

And I am not simply doubting modern imagery: I do not believe a thing these Media strangers show me as Media imagery, and I quit watching TV totally. I concentrate on real life instead, the real people and the real world around me. And I have to thank septemberclues for starting up my thinking in regard of this. TV is not reality. And I admit reality is fucked up: just not the way they show on TV.

[simonshack]

*

Ok folks,

First of all I'd like to ask: are those amazingly sharp and artful photos duly credited to any known photographer ?

Secondly, why do they all look as if they were staged in a movie set?

Thirdly, let's have a close look at -and compare in 3 easy steps - these two pictures posted by our valiant member Warriorhun:



Comparing 1 and 1 : Evidently the two pictures were shot at very different times of the day. So, are we to believe the photographer just hanged around for hours in that courtyard?

Comparing 2 and 2 : Evidently, the 2 shadows do not match. One appears to be shot at noon (man standing on car) - and the other appears to be shot in the late afternoon. Something is VERY wrong here.

Comparing 3 and 3 : Evidently, that park bench has been moved from one place to another. Ok, so it doesn't really mean much - but why on Earth would anyone move a park bench in such a situation? Is it perhaps more likely we are looking at a movie set ?

Over and out.

[SmokingGunII]

Guys - my two cents:

Like Hoi, I think "Fakery" is called too often and too soon on this forum. I believe we should allow a situation to develop before drawing those conclusions. My mind isn't made up on this subject - yet.

Warriorhun - your image is interesting. I have pitched work to the Royal family of Bahrain and we were clearly told that none of our 3d imagery should contain anyone of the female sex, so it's extremely unlikely that two supermodels would parade themselves so wantonly.

Simon - I don't agree with all of your photographic analysis, 95% yes, but the shadows on that last image remind me of the moon hoax.

[fbenario]

Sorry, I can not provide no supporting documentation with Obama's signature on it. If you have a better theory, share with me by all means, please.

So what. Please stop calling any of this democracy. It is highly likely to mislead the casual visitor to this forum.

If you don't like calling it US foreign policy manipulation, fine. Just come up with another name, please, other than democracy.

Stubbornness doesn't work on this forum. In fact, emotional or defensive answers are ALWAYS unwelcome.

[simonshack]

Simon - I don't agree with all of your photographic analysis, 95% yes, but the shadows on that last image remind me of the moon hoax.

Well, Smokey...

I hope that you're well acquainted with the ridiculous Moonhoax - the Mother of TV fakery.
You may appreciate to read these articles by Dave Mc Gowan - when you have time:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

(advice: please just narrow the window of his texts - for a more readable experience.)

[warriorhun]

Dear fbenario,

You say:

So what. Please stop calling any of this democracy... Just come up with another name, please, other than democracy.

I say: why should I? They call Iraq a democracy. American foreign policy manipulation is exporting the same system as in Iraq: democracy. It is called democracy. The American system is called democracy.
I live in a secular, liberal democracy. I know it perfectly well, that it is the same old system as communism, less violent but just as destructive. Destoying nation-states, destroying religion, destroying solidarity. When parties offer you your choice of representatives, then does it matter if it is a one-party system or multiple-party system? Hungary is called a democracy, and it has nothing to do with ancient Athens, believe me.

This is democracy, my man.

And when I say "Crescent of Democracy", I quote Gary Brecher aka. War Nerd from old exile.ru, and you have to quote the classics correctly.
And "Crescent of Democracy" is a much cooler name by far than "Something too large to describe at the moment".
I named the events honoring the work of Gary Brecher.

But you want evidence, don't you?
How about a confidential American diplomatic cable WarriorHunLeaks just received from an un-named source?:

Confidential Amrican Diplomatic Cable no.1.
From: President Obama
To: Simon Peresz Israeli Minister

Hi Perry,

Shouldn't our "Crescent of Democracy"-plan (sic!) start up, to de-stabilize the Middle East, and let a lot of camelfuckin' ragheads and their bitches die?

Obama XXX
Ps. I will never forget those balmy Tel-Avivi nights. I was so young, and you were so experienced in, hm, politics. Barry XXX

Confidential American Diplomatic Cable no.2.
From: Simon Peresz Israeli Minister
To: President Obama

Shalom Barry,

My men are ready. Let the "Crescent of Democracy"-plan (sic!) roll!

Perry XXX
Ps. Invite me to the Oval Office during your daughters' Bat Mitzvah, I still know a trick or two in, hm, politics. Perry XXX

Do we need any more evidence I ask?

[Terence.drew]

Well, Smokey...

I hope that you're well acquainted with the ridiculous Moonhoax - the Mother of TV fakery.
You may appreciate to read these articles by Dave Mc Gowan - when you have time:

http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/Apollo1.html

The first time I read these Simon I thought they were so well written they should be f*&king framed!

ArcAngel4Myke Has this on his youtube channel.


Internet Search: The National Aeronautics and Space Act

You will find buried written in this Act:
"TITLE I--SHORT TITLE, DECLARATION OF POLICY, AND DEFINITIONS
SHORT TITLE"

"DECLARATION OF POLICY AND PURPOSE"

Sec. 102. (f) The Congress declares that the general welfare of the United States requires that the unique competence of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in science and engineering systems be directed to assisting in bioengineering research, development, and demonstration programs designed to alleviate and minimize the effects of disability."


I.e. Part of NASA's remit, and hidden slightly behind this ambiguous phrase,is to run demonstration programs to help the welfare of the United Stated and minimize the effects of disability.

'Disability' here has nothing to do with disabled people, but the creation of the illusion of 'ability'. The people behind these hoaxes do not like breaking the law within their own territories and will always 'cover their asses' with some legalese get out clause.
The same is probably true for the 911 case. No one actually getting killed, and the demolition of buildings as requested and paid for by the owner are not crimes (don't break my balls here I am talking in the legalese sense and within this specific territory!):) Does anyone know the laws on misleading the general public through false depictions or are there any?

[simonshack]

Brilliant post, Terence. Your last paragraph should be f*&king framed!


Now, to return to the 'burning' Middle East...here's a marvellous quote credited to a Libyan engineer:

"Gaddafi cannot be beaten," said Salah Bilkhail, an engineer. "Al Qaeda and America have been plotting to take Libya's oil. They will never succeed."

http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/i ... dChannel=0

Wot? America and Al Quaeda plotting together? Ooh c'mon - he's gotta be kidding !
(sorry, folks - I just love those smilies...)

Oh, and btw: This morning, in Tripoli, there were apparently large, joyful pro-Gaddafi celebrations with honking cars and shots in the air (the reason being, it is said, that the government has retaken control of the 'rebels' uprising in various cities). But hear, hear : the 'ever-authoritative' major Italian newspaper "La Repubblica" assures us that "it was only a phony Gaddafi propaganda exercise"...

[hoi.polloi]

Good publicity move, actually.

If the American media attacks, use the public opportunity to link al Qaeda and America in the public's mind. This Gaddafi may not be a complete tool.

[warriorhun]

Dear All,

I promised to post only the most outrageous pictures. "Oh my godness, there's another one. This seems to be on purpose."
Ras Lanuf rebel offensive, Libya. Courtesy of REUTERS/Goran Tomasevic.


Rebel fighters pray during a battle near Ras Lanuf, March 4, 2011.

Now, why on Earth would they do such thing? It is clearly not prayer time, the fellow muslims at the background do not give a fuck.
Of course they prayed before battle. And even if it was prayer time, when you are on the road, or on warpath, you postpone the prayers and do it later, as far as the Koran is concerned. Why don't they simply recite the Shahada during the charge (which should have been "Mohammed Atta"'s last words on the radio before the WTC-hit, instead of "Allah Akbar")? And even if they are so devout Muslims that they would not miss prayer time like the rest in the background, AT LEAST ALL PRAYING REBELS SHOULD HAVE THE DECENCY TO TURN AND PRAY TOWARDS MECCA, ALL OF THEM!

Folks, there are no Western reporters in Libya taking pictures, every image is faked, I claim. I challenge you: give me just one reason, why should Western reporters be there...considering the 5 reasons I have given in one of my previous posts on why there sholdn't be a single one of them...