By now many in the US have realized the enormous influence the industrial-military complex has in government. This was made clear when massive amounts of money were spent on US companies working in Iraq. President Dwight Eisenhower once warned Americans about this in his farewell address:
Currently they seem to have many tactics to push their agenda into the mind of the average American. Why do they need consent from the US population? It is the taxpayers who will take the hit physically, by sending young people to war, and economically, by financing the war. Here is part of the list which has become very obvious since they already used it to justify the invasion of Iraq:
1) Appeal to the US population's conscience for help with the objective
The first time the appeal was directed at stopping a dictator in Iraq from killing a group:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,391985,00.html
Now we have the same appeal directed at stopping a dictator in Libya from killing another group:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110307/ap_on_re_af/af_libya
Yet there was no fast, hard talk of intervention for other humanitarian crises. For example an African humanitarian crisis:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20765-2004Jul1.html
Is this a coincidence?
2) Bombard the US population with broadcasts about the objective
News are filled with repeating images from Libya, while other similar situations like large protests and people getting killed in Iraq during the protests by their own government are totally ignored on TV:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/05/world/la-fg-iraq-protests-20110305
Is this a coincidence?
3) Remind the US population of 911 and associate it with the objective
911 was used has an excuse to invade Iraq even though later it was proven there were no links between Iraq and 911:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
Now the public can see on TV a strangely timed release of "new footage" from 911 just as talk of military intervention is being passed around in the news:
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8001106
Along with official statements linking this other dictator to another terrorist attack:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/03/06/barack-obama-orders-lockerbie-bomber-al-megrahi-be-seized-115875-22969487/
Is this a coincidence?
4) Affect the US population economically to increase their resentment towards the objective
News broadcasts repeat over and over again the alleged relationship between the rise in gas prices and the objective. Yet quoting the US Energy Information Administration the major sources of oil for the US are:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
The objective is not even mentioned in this list, thus quantity wise it should not be significant. So why have gas prices risen so sharply?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/08/AR2011030805121.html
Is this a coincidence?
5) Cumulative use of propaganda techniques on the US population
The previous four items buy consent from the average American by combining well-known propaganda techniques:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques
Ad nauseam (An idea that is repeated enough times may begin to be taken as the truth) on TV.
Appeal to authority (Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position, idea, argument, or course of action).
Appeal to fear (Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population).
Appeal to prejudice (Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition).
Demonizing the enemy (Making individuals from the opposing nation appear to be subhuman through accusations).
Currently they seem to have many tactics to push their agenda into the mind of the average American. Why do they need consent from the US population? It is the taxpayers who will take the hit physically, by sending young people to war, and economically, by financing the war. Here is part of the list which has become very obvious since they already used it to justify the invasion of Iraq:
1) Appeal to the US population's conscience for help with the objective
The first time the appeal was directed at stopping a dictator in Iraq from killing a group:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,391985,00.html
Now we have the same appeal directed at stopping a dictator in Libya from killing another group:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110307/ap_on_re_af/af_libya
Yet there was no fast, hard talk of intervention for other humanitarian crises. For example an African humanitarian crisis:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20765-2004Jul1.html
Is this a coincidence?
2) Bombard the US population with broadcasts about the objective
News are filled with repeating images from Libya, while other similar situations like large protests and people getting killed in Iraq during the protests by their own government are totally ignored on TV:
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/mar/05/world/la-fg-iraq-protests-20110305
Is this a coincidence?
3) Remind the US population of 911 and associate it with the objective
911 was used has an excuse to invade Iraq even though later it was proven there were no links between Iraq and 911:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16.html
Now the public can see on TV a strangely timed release of "new footage" from 911 just as talk of military intervention is being passed around in the news:
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/national_world&id=8001106
Along with official statements linking this other dictator to another terrorist attack:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2011/03/06/barack-obama-orders-lockerbie-bomber-al-megrahi-be-seized-115875-22969487/
Is this a coincidence?
4) Affect the US population economically to increase their resentment towards the objective
News broadcasts repeat over and over again the alleged relationship between the rise in gas prices and the objective. Yet quoting the US Energy Information Administration the major sources of oil for the US are:
| Total Imports of Petroleum (Top 15 Countries) (Thousand Barrels per Day) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Country | Dec-10 | Nov-10 | YTD 2010 | Dec-09 | YTD 2009 |
| CANADA | 2,713 | 2,510 | 2,532 | 2,710 | 2,479 |
| MEXICO | 1,365 | 1,363 | 1,280 | 1,204 | 1,210 |
| SAUDI ARABIA | 1,087 | 1,141 | 1,094 | 877 | 1,004 |
| NIGERIA | 1,070 | 860 | 1,025 | 1,029 | 809 |
| VENEZUELA | 917 | 942 | 987 | 849 | 1,063 |
| RUSSIA | 514 | 553 | 611 | 385 | 563 |
| ALGERIA | 484 | 572 | 507 | 544 | 493 |
| IRAQ | 336 | 340 | 414 | 325 | 450 |
| ANGOLA | 319 | 276 | 390 | 278 | 460 |
| BRAZIL | 295 | 198 | 271 | 184 | 309 |
| UNITED KINGDOM | 236 | 187 | 256 | 199 | 245 |
| COLOMBIA | 231 | 492 | 365 | 231 | 276 |
| ECUADOR | 192 | 194 | 197 | 86 | 185 |
| VIRGIN ISLANDS | 191 | 234 | 255 | 289 | 277 |
| KUWAIT | 125 | 170 | 197 | 160 | 182 |
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/company_level_imports/current/import.html
The objective is not even mentioned in this list, thus quantity wise it should not be significant. So why have gas prices risen so sharply?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/03/08/AR2011030805121.html
Is this a coincidence?
5) Cumulative use of propaganda techniques on the US population
The previous four items buy consent from the average American by combining well-known propaganda techniques:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques
Ad nauseam (An idea that is repeated enough times may begin to be taken as the truth) on TV.
Appeal to authority (Appeals to authority cite prominent figures to support a position, idea, argument, or course of action).
Appeal to fear (Appeals to fear seek to build support by instilling anxieties and panic in the general population).
Appeal to prejudice (Using loaded or emotive terms to attach value or moral goodness to believing the proposition).
Demonizing the enemy (Making individuals from the opposing nation appear to be subhuman through accusations).