Noam Chomsky - On possède le monde / Éducation sur les guerres US
Voici un article fort intéressant de Noam Chomsky sur la mentalité de plusieurs à la tête des États-Unis et aussi à travers la population. Bien des éléments de leur politique étrangère commencent à avoir du sens si on les analyse à travers le filtre selon lequel ils pensent que le monde leur appartient.
Suite à cela, j'ai posté un lien vers une campagne d'un Allemand qui a acheté des pages dans le New York Times pour essayer d'éduquer les Américains sur les guerres qu'ils ont mené dans l'histoire. Vous trouverez les pages en question en liens PDF plus bas.
Just a little footnote. How many offensive nuclear armed missiles does the
We Own The World
ZNet, January 1, 2008
You all know, of course, there was an election -- what is called "an election" in the
As few people know, a couple of months earlier there were extensive polls in
The figures are higher for Arab Iraq in the areas where troops were actually deployed. A very large majority felt that the presence of
Well, the reaction in the post-election
Then came the "debate." We are a free and open society, after all, so we have "lively" debates. On the one side were the hawks who said, "The Iranians are interfering, we have to bomb them." On the other side were the doves who said, "We cannot be sure the evidence is correct, maybe you misread the serial numbers or maybe it is just the revolutionary guards and not the government."
So we had the usual kind of debate going on, which illustrates a very important and pervasive distinction between several types of propaganda systems. To take the ideal types, exaggerating a little: totalitarian states' propaganda is that you better accept it, or else. And "or else" can be of various consequences, depending on the nature of the state. People can actually believe whatever they want as long as they obey. Democratic societies use a different method: they don't articulate the party line. That's a mistake. What they do is presuppose it, then encourage vigorous debate within the framework of the party line. This serves two purposes. For one thing it gives the impression of a free and open society because, after all, we have lively debate. It also instills a propaganda line that becomes something you presuppose, like the air you breathe.
That was the case here. This is a classic illustration. The whole debate about the Iranian "interference" in
So if you look over the debate that took place and is still taking place about Iranian interference, no one points out this is insane. How can
À suivre dans l'article sous l'hyperlien ci-haut... -LNI
Jürgen Todenhöfer says on his website that he has drafted 10 theses to be printed in 3 parts. The first 2 parts, containing the first 5 theses, were printed on two full pages of today's New York Times, pages 6 and 7, and in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and the Al-Quds Al-Arabi. The third part is to be printed on Sunday. These hugely expensive ads refer readers to this website: www.why-do-you-kill-zaid.com
Here is part 1: PDF.
Here is part 2: PDF.