Benghazi and the Propaganda Circus.

All throughout the Fifth Column Treasonous Media the battle lines are being drawn once again. Those evil and vile Republicans are once again daring to try to embarrass the Messiah of Marxism. Somewhere in the darkest neither regions of hell they found 3 criminal whistle blowers who will spread the most vicious lies imaginable about that Obamanation Administration and Foggy Bottom heir apparent Queen Hillary.

Yes, that really is the mental attitude of the Progressive Liberal Marxists in the Fifth Column Treasonous Media. It’s readily on display in the “News Rooms” all across America. The contempt can be seen spilling from the poison pen letter writing of the Chicago Tribune’s condescending

U.S. diplomatic security back in focus at Benghazi hearing

The assault was a headache for Obama as he campaigned for re-election. Many Republicans continue to assail the Democratic president over security lapses, as well as the administration’s early conflicting accounts of what happened in Benghazi.

Democrats acknowledged the attacks reflected security problems, but said they were part of a history of such violence as well as the instability since the Arab Spring of popular revolutions began in 2011.

Congressional committees already have held a series of hearings into what happened in Benghazi.

In January, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended her handling of the attack before Senate and House committees and was angered at Republican accusations that the administration had misled the country over whether the attacks stemmed from a protest.

Issa denied that Wednesday’s hearing is an effort by Republicans – who hold a majority in the House – to discredit the Democratic administration.

“Why aren’t the Democrats just as upset that we didn’t do all we could do to save American lives?” he asked on CNN.

What is taking place in this Chicago Tribune article is a text book example of propaganda and indoctrination. It’s bias is as razor sharp and dangerous as any surgeons scalpel. It paints the Republicans as nasty partisan politicians looking for any weakness or advantage they can find to discredit the Obamanation Administration while painting the Democrats as long suffering servants of the people.

More importantly, this subtle application of bias, ridicule and mockery is not exclusive to the Chicago Tribune, this is not the exception to the rule, it is the rule. This same predictable bias is equally on display over at The National Journal.

What to Expect at Wednesday’s Benghazi Hearing

Carney referred to the ARB report when asked about Hicks’s accusations. “It was unsparing. It was critical,” Carney said. “And it held people accountable and it made a series of recommendations for action that could be taken to improve security to reduce the potential for these kinds of events from happening in the future.”

The ARB process is now under review itself. The State Department’s inspector general is conducting a special review into the “effectiveness and accountability” of the ARB process. But State Department officials maintain that the special review will not just focus on the Benghazi ARB, nor was it spurred by Benghazi.

When asked if this week’s hearing and ongoing investigation was “merely political,” State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell said “It certainly seems so so far,” telling reporters during a briefing Monday that “this is not sort of a collaborative process where these — the committee is working directly with us and trying to establish facts that would help as we look to keep our people safe overseas in a very complex environment.”

Ventrell also said he couldn’t comment on what’s been reported on the expected testimony of the witnesses because the State Department hasn’t been provided the full transcripts. “Now we understand this testimony’s going to go forward, and we want people to go and tell the truth,” Ventrell said. “But in terms of the full context of these remarks or these sort of accusations, we don’t have the full context, so it’s hard for us to respond.”

The technique employed here, just as in the Chicago Tribune piece is predicated upon how the human mind processes information. That can be described as, last in, first out. What that means is that the last thing you read becomes the fulcrum from which your bias is set by. It is analogous to shining a flashlight around a dark room. What becomes forefront in your mind, is what is currently being illuminated by the flashlight.

By carefully staging the scene so that there is nothing profoundly shocking seen in the room when first entered, the viewers mind is tricked into placing in the highest memory priority the last thing seen before the flashlight is turned off.

Here is CNN doing the exact same thing.

Fireworks expected in Benghazi whistle-blower hearing

Critics have questioned the validity of continued congressional scrutiny, especially Democrats, who say Republicans are only interested in discrediting the administration and hurting Clinton’s chances if she were to run for president in 2016.

On Tuesday, the Benghazi outrage was noticeably muted in the Senate when only three members of the 18-person Senate Foreign Relations Committee attended the hearing to confirm Stevens’ replacement, Ambassador Deborah Jones.

Jones, a career diplomat, said she would take responsibility for personnel security if confirmed as ambassador.

“On security — and again, this is something that is, well, as we know, it is deadly serious for us,” she said. “It is the role of the ambassador — the ambassador is the principal security officer at post. And it is the ambassador who has to decide whether to allow people to travel here or there, whether to ask for additional assets, whether to insist on additional assets.”

She also pledged to “work closely with the Libyan government to see that justice is realized” in the Benghazi attacks.

A muted response from Senate Republicans continued Wednesday when Sen. Bob Corker, one of the three senators who attended Jones confirmation hearing, told NBC News that he was “satisfied” with what he knows about Benghazi.

“I’ve been able to read all the cables. I’ve seen the films,” he said. “I feel like I know what happened in Benghazi. I’m fairly satisfied.”

“But look, the House wants to have hearings, I hope they’re done in a respectful way and hopefully it will shed some light on what happened.”

From coast to coast the various elements of the Fifth Column Treasonous Media are employing these and other propaganda technique designed specifically to lead those reading or watching their performances into adopting and holding a certain specific prejudicial bias. That specific prejudicial bias is this…

a) a terrible tragedy occurred in Benghazi
b) The Obama Administration and the Clinton State Department are trying to get to the truth about what happened
c) the Republicans are attempting to blame senior administration members for what happened for partisan political advantage.
d) there is no cover-up or scandal with regard to the Benghazi incident, only ruthless republican partisans seeking to damage Obama and Clinton politically.

What is being witnessed here is nothing less than the worlds most accomplished prevaricating prestidigitator’s putting on the most elaborate Kabuki Theater smoke and mirrors act in history. Once upon a time in a galaxy far far away, there was a concept called, the five W’s.

The Five W’s.

The Five Ws, Five Ws and one H, or the Six Ws are questions whose answers are considered basic in information-gathering. They are often mentioned in journalism (cf. news style), research, and police investigations.[1] They constitute a formula for getting the complete story on a subject.[2] According to the principle of the Five Ws, a report can only be considered complete if it answers these questions starting with an interrogative word:[3]

Who is it about?
What happened?
When did it take place?
Where did it take place?
Why did it happen?

Some authors add a sixth question, “how”, to the list, though “how” can also be covered by “what”, “where”, or “when”:[3]

How did it happen

Each question should have a factual answer — facts necessary to include for a report to be considered complete.[4] Importantly, none of these questions can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no”.

In British education, the Five Ws are used in Key Stage 3 (age 11–14) lessons.[5]

Once upon a time, back before Hunter S Thompson made it chic to make the so called journalists personal ideology the underlying foundation of every story, the five W’s were the foundational bedrock of journalism. Who, what, when, where and why and of course, when required, how. No bias by the reporter or “Journalist”, as Sargent Joe Friday would have said, “Just the facts mam/sir, just the facts”. Let the fact speak for themselves and allow the reader or viewer to draw their own conclusions.

The problem that the Progressive Liberal Marxist’s running the Fifth Column Treasonous Media ran into was, that the damned general public didn’t share their ideological bias and could not be trusted to come to the “Correct” or desired conclusions based solely on the facts. Rather than acting like a judge in a courtroom who took aggressive steps to ensure that neither the prosecutor nor the advocate lead their witnesses and thus the jury, the Fifth Column Treasonous Media adopted the position of various propaganda ministries modeled after Nazi Germany (Joesph Goebbels) and Stalin Era Pravda.

Let me boil this down for you to it’s purest most distilled essence. The Mainstream Media is engaging i a campaign of propaganda designed not to inform you, but rather to tell you what you are suppose to thin. Yes, right straight out of George Orwell’s 1984.

Having spent nearly a year doing everything they could imagine to prevent the story behind the Benghazi incident from becoming a major story, they are now trying to rewrite the narrative so as to dismiss the story as nothing more than Republican Parisian political maneuvering against the Democrat Party. In other words, “Nothing to see here, move along”.

If you have anything even remotely resembling personal integrity, morals or ethics, ask yourself this question, and try to answer it honestly.

What kind of coverage would the Mainstream Media and the Democrat Party be demanding on this story if Sarah Palin were the President under whose administration the Attack on the American Ambassador in Benghazi had taken place. If you can’t answer that question honestly (if you are not admitting that you would be screaming for her impeachment), it’s because you are a Democrat Progressive Liberal Marxist and the answer would obliterate your facade and pretext of honesty and objectivity.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s