advertisement


The War You Don't See.

maxflinn

maxflinn

pfm Member
John Pilger's excellent documentary investigating the role of the mainstream media in wars is on YouTube.

A powerful and timely investigation into the media's role in war, tracing the history of embedded and independent reporting from the carnage of World War One to the destruction of Hiroshima, and from the invasion of Vietnam to the current war in Afghanistan and disaster in Iraq.

As weapons and propaganda become even more sophisticated, the nature of war is developing into an electronic battlefield in which journalists play a key role, and civilians are the victims. But who is the real enemy?

John Pilger says in the film: "We journalists... have to be brave enough to defy those who seek our collusion in selling their latest bloody adventure in someone else's country... That means always challenging the official story, however patriotic that story may appear, however seductive and insidious it is.

For propaganda relies on us in the media to aim its deceptions not at a far away country but at you at home... In this age of endless imperial war, the lives of countless men, women and children depend on the truth or their blood is on us... Those whose job it is to keep the record straight ought to be the voice of people, not power."
Click to expand...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
64528520.jpg
 
jackbarron said:
Have you watched the documentary?
Click to expand...

What, it isn't all about teh evil American military industrial neocon war machine?

Or am I confusing it with the the one on ITV this week about teh evil American military industrial neocon war machine spoiling for a fight with China?
 
I wonder whether any of the footage was edited. For example, in the opening sequence, the audio refers to 'people' on the ground whereas I'm sure it's de rigueur to say the least for military personnel to refer to such persons as enemy combatants, targets, soldiers, militants and so on in order to de-humanise their actions.
 
maxflinn said:
No, he doesn't go into all the wars the West started.

It's only an hour and a half long..
Click to expand...

It would only take a few seconds to quote the civilian casualty percentage for another country so it's hardly an excuse.
 
maxflinn said:
From the vid:
Click to expand...

I think the WW1 and perhaps the WW2 figures are a tad misleading in that quote though. Factor in how many of the servicemen who died would, but for the war, have been civilians and I suspect the stats would look very different. In other words, I suspect most of the casualties in those wars were, in effect, civilians in uniform, ie not career soldiers.

I take the point, though, that civilian casualties are more a factor in modern warfare.
 
Seeker_UK said:
It would only take a few seconds to quote the civilian casualty percentage for another country so it's hardly an excuse.
Click to expand...

Sure why not look it up then?

Be careful though if you find figures provided by the Syrian Observatory For Human Rights, as he counts the Western-backed terrorists used as proxies to prosecute the regime change, that were killed, not as enemy combatants, but civilians..
 
maxflinn said:
No, he doesn't go into all the wars the West started.

It's only an hour and a half long..
Click to expand...

The figures given here are for WW1, WW2, Vietnam and Iraq. So you're saying the west didn't start these? We could argue Japan started WW2 if that helps your argument . You need to be clear.

The initial quote you give talks about who is the real enemy. I will help you here. This is from people who actually fought in WW2, it was the Axis powers. They were from the east and west.

Vietnam is in there too. What's your opinion on that one, did the west start it? Did the French start the fighting or cause the fighting to start? Don't forget there were plenty in the south who supported the French.

If you want to talk about civilian losses can you include Uncle Joe? I don't want to find the wrong figures so could you tell me how many Russian civilians he "dealt with"? How many soldiers died as a result of him getting rid of their effective generals early in WW2? Then compare these to the other figures here please.

I hate to do this with human lives but I think the point will be self explanatory.
 
maxflinn said:
The vid highlights the Western media and its collusion with the relevant Western states governments (US, UK) in brainwashing the public into acceptance of the various wars based on lies and falsehoods..
Click to expand...

Brainwashed. You've been challenged on this many times. It's obviously wrong. Why do you keep saying it?

If the west are brainwashed, what are the North Koreans?

You're from the west, are you brainwashed? If you're not and we all have access to the same, largely western from your links, are those who don't agree with you? Don't forget you've said you don't read the western media. A wee bit contradictory and one reason I have a view on your posts.
 
fay spook said:
The figures given here are for WW1, WW2, Vietnam and Iraq. So you're saying the west didn't start these? We could argue Japan started WW2 if that helps your argument . You need to be clear.

The initial quote you give talks about who is the real enemy. I will help you here. This is from people who actually fought in WW2, it was the Axis powers. They were from the east and west.

Vietnam is in there too. What's your opinion on that one, did the west start it? Did the French start the fighting or cause the fighting to start? Don't forget there were plenty in the south who supported the French.

If you want to talk about civilian losses can you include Uncle Joe? I don't want to find the wrong figures so could you tell me how many Russian civilians he "dealt with"? How many soldiers died as a result of him getting rid of their effective generals early in WW2? Then compare these to the other figures here please.

I hate to do this with human lives but I think the point will be self explanatory.
Click to expand...

John Pilger's contact details:

http://johnpilger.com/contact

Please let us know what his answers were.
 
fay spook said:
Brainwashed. You've been challenged on this many times. It's obviously wrong. Why do you keep saying it?

If the west are brainwashed, what are the North Koreans?

You're from the west, are you brainwashed? If you're not and we all have access to the same, largely western from your links, are those who don't agree with you? Don't forget you've said you don't read the western media. A wee bit contradictory and one reason I have a view on your posts.
Click to expand...

Do you not like the term 'brainwashing'?

OK, so what word would you use to describe the use of constant lies and propaganda being bestowed upon the public by way of a media working in tandem with government(s) in order to mislead?

Oh and I guess I was brainwashed in 2003, when I was silly enough to figure that the US and UK and the media probably wouldn't be making up stories about Saddam. And in 2011 when I assumed what they said about Gadaffi was probably true. And no doubt at other times. We're being lied to much of the time when it comes to wars..

Lately though, the last two years or so I'm very sceptical of anything war-related coming out of the mouths of politicians, and mainstream media.

I find that if you do enough digging you usually find out that they've been lying through their teeth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top