Saturday, 21 January 2012

BBC's Syrian Brainwashing: Four Legs Good, Two Legs Bad

How the BBC Works

On the BBC last night there were two news stories.

In one, balaclava clad men were using weapons against the army of the state they grew up in. The army of that state were fighting back against them, sending troops into their towns. The balaclava clad men, who shot at state soldiers, were the heroes for the BBC, who showed them being cheered on, by only a couple of hundred people at most, in a town.

BBC's freedom fighter?
In the next story some balaclava clad men were using weapons against the army of the state they grew up in. The army of that state were fighting back sending troops into their towns. The balaclava men, who shot at state soldiers, were the terrorists for the BBC, who said they 'only enjoyed support in a few enclaves.'

One of these stories was about Syria and the Free Syrian Army which shoots Syrian soldiers (and civilians) and the other was about Northern Ireland and the Real IRA which shoots British soldiers (and civilians).

Yet the BBC tells us one are heroes, freedom fighters, brave patriots fighting occupation and oppression, whilst the others are extremists, terrorists, murderers seeking to upset peace, opposed by the majority and with no justification in their actions. The language in one report is a complete reversal of the language in the other report, which goes to show how the BBC plays the British public, pushing us to support "balaclava men" when it suits them, the Secret State and the political classes, but to oppose "balaclava men" that suits all those vested interests.

Funnily enough, in the latest Private Eye there is a report on how the British Ambassador to Bahrain sent out a statement congratulating Bahrain for putting down its uprising, and stating how Saudi Arabia was correct to send in vehicles and men to help put down the uprising. The same British State is now busy telling us how wrong Syria is to try and put down its own uprising!

Or let's put it this way, when does the BBC think an Arab with a bazooka is good: when he's killing Syrian troops. Would they say the same if he was killing Israeli, Iraqi, Afghani or Saudi troops?

So to recap, it's Syrian armed insurrectionists good, Irish armed insurrectionists bad.

Bahraini/Saudi crushing rebellion good, Syrian crushing rebellion bad.

And what's the news just in: four legs good, two legs bad?

Just so long as the BBC is there to tell us!

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

So what exactly are you whinging about? Are you supportive of Assad or the Fenians or both?

Your missive is very much of the 'John Craven Newsround' type, simplified (and conveniently overlooking the much bigger picture).

One very fundamental difference is that the Syrians insurrectionists are merely seeking 'regime change' in their own country, the IRA ('Real' or otherwise) are seeking to achieve their own Gaelic expansionist (in the name of religion when it suits them) ideals.

It appears that you are likening Assad's repressive regime to that which we have in Britain?! Sometimes your political acumen is a wonder to behold!

As Mark Twain would have said, "sometimes it is best to sit and say nothing and appear ignorant, than to open ones mouth and thus remove all doubt!"

Anonymous said...

And still the British people cough up £145 every year pretty much without question, for the privilege of being lied to. Good sheep.

Anonymous said...

Your tone sounds sympathetic to the IRA. I know the ITP are hardcore catholics, but this article doesn't sit right with me.

Final Conflict said...

Er... the BBC paints one lot of men shooting coppers and army as bad and one lot as good. That is the point.

We know NOTHING about the Syrians, and foreign involvement is suspected - yet the BBC say they are "good" whilst in the next breath condemning similar tactics by the RIRA.

Are you saying the BBC is NOT doing that?

As for thoserushing to protect the British State... hmmm. Interesting!

So we have "democracy" -- what? putting a cross in a box every 4-5 years for Freemason A or Freemason B - whose position is decided by the media and a political party machinery controlled by Big Money.

It is you that needs to grow up or remain silent!

I have no loyalty to the British State which put my forefathers in slums and has betrayed my children's birthright.

Anonymous said...

I am an English National Socialist who believes in Irish reunification. I do not support the Marxist IRA. Is this unacceptable to you who are unionists, some of you not even racialists? I am a member of a nationalist party. Not its not the ITP. It is NS.

harry said...

READ THE ARTICLE. It has a pop at the BBC for dictating how we read the news on events in SEVERAL countries. THAT IS FACT. Get away from all the emotional historical British State worship. And no I dont support the IRA, but i can see the BBC for WHAT IT IS. The BBC DOES support the IRA . McGuiness the British State asset is sitting in Stormont and the BBC think he is peachy.

Anonymous said...

For the English NS, what reunification are you talking about? Ireland has NEVER been united in the sense you purport it to have ever been.

So what part of the Mainland would be equivalent to the Syrian insurrectionists 'mainland'?

And FC, speak for yourself when you declare that "we know NOTHING about the Syrians" you don't know that some of us are a little closer to matters than your mickey mouse take on things.

Final Conflict said...

Oh so you know who is behind the insurrectionists do you? Come on! pull the other one! The Russians and others are hinting at outside secret state involvement, so please give us the FULL low down. Namethe names, provide the logistics, give the dates and quantities. Or are you just spouting?

NS and Proud said...

Ireland has never been united? No because the british state has invaded and divided. if you mean the early medieval kingdoms, you mean like the English ones? This is old horse shit. Ireland was a united entity when it was part of the UK. if it was good enough for westminster then why not now. and the United Irishmen who wanted a united ireland were prods and taigs. you are just picking and choosing history. it's like Ireland taking control of Northumberland and saying that it used to be separate and Danish.

Anonymous said...

Some people will always support the Westminster State. When it controlled all of Ireland they didnt want Ireland divided. Now they dont want Ireland united.

Make your mind up.

Final Conflict said...

Surely the issue is that if it is wrong to kill soldiers and civilians in Northern Ireland (or England); why is it acceptable to kill soldiers and civilians in Syria?

We heard that special forces helped the Libyan rebels (who did the same, and raped/tortured too). Do you really not think special forces aren't helping the Syrian rebels? The Russians have said as much!

If the BBC thinks their actions are so laudable, why then does it condemn (next moment) the Real IRA for doing the same?

Sorry if that is too complicated for some people to grasp. Or for trolls to understand in its simplicity!

If some people prefer to get all upset over a perceived slight to the British Government/regime than get to grasp with the realities of what the NWO/globalists are doing (for Israel's benefit) then I suggest their primary loyalty is probably to Tel Aviv (and then Westminster).

Anonymous said...

The IRA (OIRA PIRA RIRA or CIRA), INLA, IPLO are anti-white gangsters and drug pushers.

BUT so are the UVF, UFF, UDA and the rest.

None are pro-white.

norm said...

i understand your point but it was a bit muddled.

Anonymous said...

10:49 PM: your just plastic patriots, not racialists. mosley said europe a nation. do you want your little border cutting off ulster. cutting white folk from white folk?

Anonymous said...

I am british and believe in the UK. I do not support what is happening in Syria, Libya and so on.

Anonymous said...

the pays de calais is forever british

Anonymous said...

people who shoot civilians are cowards

Third Positionist said...

No More Brothers' Wars? Empty rhetoric?

Anonymous said...

what is this? God Save Westminster and the BBC??? Get over State manipulation

Anonymous said...

For the last time and i'll cap this so everybody with a lack of comprehension can see:

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT ABOUT SUPPORTING THE RIRA SO QUIT IT WITH THE HISSY FITS. IT'S ABOUT SHOWING THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF THE BBC AND HOW THEY SUPPORT UPRISINGS IN ONE COUNTRY BECAUSE IT SUITS THE GLOBALIST AGENDA BUT NOT IN ANOTHER BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SUIT THE AGENDA.

It really shouldn't be hard to grasp that.

Anonymous said...

We're all waiting for the all-seeing oracle's details on EXACTLY who is involved in syria. He's slapped you down FC without providing ANY facts, let alone detailed and realistic ones involving the hidden hand(s) behind the insurrectionists. Perhaps he supports the MI6/CIA/Mossad efforts to attack a soveregn nation? How fascinating.

Anonymous said...

So FC you concede that "we know NOTHING about the Syrians" yet you have built this whole post around this.

As regards 1:02 he also backs up your empty rhetoric by not only echoing this sentiment but then also 'reveals' how the hidden hands behind the insurrectionists are proxies for MI6/CIA/Mossad in their attack on a sovereign nation, now which nation exactly are you refering to? Britain or Syria.

It also is not the perogative of anon to do your own dirty work for you, you were the one who has made the original point, it is far more amusing to witness such a 'know-it-all' getting hoist by his own petard as it were.

Final Conflict said...

Anon 1:09: "So FC you concede that "we know NOTHING about the Syrians" yet you have built this whole post around this."

Get out from your own backside. I have clarified that there have been major hints by the Russians and the Syrians of external involvement. In diplomatic terms that is pointing the finger at Mossad/CIA/MI6. (Yes they are attacking Syria you clown - they aren't taking pot shots at people in Coventry or Bristol [yet]).

In light of the truth STARTING to leak out from Libya we can be as certain as possible that this is the case.

Of course we 'know nothing' as yet because that is the nature of these things. Mossad aren't going to do a press conference telling you what bombs they have planted or what snipers are stationed in which Syrian towns!

You need to get a life and stop stirring troll-like, after all you calim to know EVERYTHING, and yet you have still to present any FACTS about what is going on, still less why the BBC find balaclava-clad men shooting soldiers, policemen and civilians in Syria "heroes" and the same doing to the same in Northern Ireland as "terrorists".

Anon 12:54: "It really shouldn't be hard to grasp that."

No it shouldn't - but some people are thick, some people worship the British State (and by extension the BBC) and some people are just trolls.

Anonymous said...

>>THIS ARTICLE IS NOT ABOUT SUPPORTING THE RIRA SO QUIT IT WITH THE HISSY FITS. IT'S ABOUT SHOWING THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF THE BBC AND HOW THEY SUPPORT UPRISINGS IN ONE COUNTRY BECAUSE IT SUITS THE GLOBALIST AGENDA BUT NOT IN ANOTHER BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SUIT THE AGENDA.<<

Absolutely

Anonymous said...

"it is far more amusing to witness such a 'know-it-all' getting hoist by his own petard as it were."

you are all waffle. a right po-faced troll. You claim to know everything about syria yet tell us nothing.

Anonymous said...

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT ABOUT SUPPORTING THE RIRA SO QUIT IT WITH THE HISSY FITS. IT'S ABOUT SHOWING THE DOUBLE STANDARDS OF THE BBC AND HOW THEY SUPPORT UPRISINGS IN ONE COUNTRY BECAUSE IT SUITS THE GLOBALIST AGENDA BUT NOT IN ANOTHER BECAUSE IT DOESN'T SUIT THE AGENDA.



HEAR HEAR

Final Conflict said...

I have just deleted a post by (I believe) the same troll who tries to muddy the waters time and time again.

I am bored with his pointing the finger, so let me make this plain (as I already have!).

Balaclava-clad men who shoot civilians, whether they are the RIRA, UVF, Free Syrian Army and National Transitional Council; are terrorists.

Third Positionists has condemned terrorism as wrong morally, ideologicaly and tactically.

Two wrongs do not make a right in any situation.

IT IS THE BBC THAT CALLS ONE [RIRA] TERRORISTS AND THE OTHERS [FSA] HEROES AND FREEDOM FIGHTERS.

The idiot[s] posting on here seems to back the Syrian rebels, claims to know "everything" about Syria, yet refuses to condemn the alien elements [CIA, Mossad etc.] we are told are active in Syria.

As such he is certainly a troll - out to make the "Syrian rebels" some kind of heroes; and also to make it look as if we favour the "armed struggle."

Now I have clarified that [AGAIN] I see no reason to entertain his meandering ramblings, accusatory and deliberately false notions designed to twist the facts, defend the BBC, the British State, the Syrian "rebels" and the Zionists who stand behind them.

It seems enough of those commenting on here agree and have spoken sense on the matter.

Lancs Patriot said...

"the Syrians insurrectionists are merely seeking 'regime change' in their own country"

That is if the Syrians are behind it. Many believe the armed rebellion is being organised, financed and led by external forces.

I do NOT support the IRA under any of its names/periods and I do not condone terrorism of any hue (left or right, Irish or British).

It seems odd that I should have to draw attention to that, but the slur seems to be that anyone who is an English patriot and a Catholic (I am the first by birth and choice and the latter by birth and choice) is otherwise somehow an IRA sympathiser.

I do not accost those coming out of the local Methodist church, who would be patriotic, and accuse them of being sympathetic to the UDA or UVF.

With that out of the way.

Outside of some external monies, the IRA have at least been (as far as I know) Irishmen led by Irishmen (even some protestants). Misled or pushed into violence and killing innocents, reprisal and outrage. probable gangsters etc etc yes, but home-grown criminials.

The Syrians are led by Israelis, Yanks and our own special forces/secret services.

THAT is the important thing. THAT seems to be the difference looking (at both) from the outside.

The Provos and their various offshoots are out to change a border (via violence and mayhem).

The Syrians are out take over an entire country for the sake of alien and enemy nations.

Its more like Israeli-led British terrorists rioting shooting and bombing on the streets of London, Birmingham and Manchester, trying to take over towns and making them 'free' with the help of Mossad and external special forces.

Imagine the London and Manchester riots were coordinated by external secret services and special forces.

Perhaps then the plastic patriot might reassess his petty squabbling.

Plastic patriots will say this rioting, shooting and bombing is right in Syria but wrong here (in Croydon or Belfast).

THEY are the traitors and soft-peddlars on terrorism.

They are the, to use your analogy FC, two legs good four legs bad.

Anonymous said...

What you said made sense to me. don't worry if one or two morons want to stir it up. They always have and they always will.

Anonymous said...

trolls will always deliberately twist what you write and seek to smear.

Catholic Resistance said...

Hence the fact that I say Nationalism is dead in this country. Pagan weirdoes and Judeo-Protestants are the order of the day in today's modern Nationalism. Catholic's need to forget about this dead end game and just move on from the rat race. Let's actually start taking the ideas of two of our greatest heroes seriously, GK Chesterton and Hilaire Belloc!

Final Conflict said...

Oi Mr 'know it all' anon - still waiting for you to inform us poor mortals of all the ins and outs, all the facts and figures, all the names and dates, of the Syria "uprising" - don't forget to name all the foreign secret state and special forces personnel.

despite all the flennel the silence has been deafening

Anonymous said...

"There is no government, no state in Syria - it is run by a mafia."

Mahmoud Haj Hamad, who was the treasury's top auditor at the Defence Ministry until he fled Syria in December 2011.

Final Conflict said...

Oh - like the 'dissidents' who fled Iraq who said there were WMDs, or the Yankee puppets in Kabul who are corrupt up to their eyeballs.

Come on. You can do better than that.

Ed said...

"So what exactly are you whinging about?"

Probably Zionist muppets like you. Go take a hike.

Rufus said...

Some of the comments on here are unbvelievable. The article condemns those who murder, whether in Ireland or Syria. In each case, the Zionist Establishment are involved. Just as the IRA and UVF are masonic led State assets, so the Syrian 'rebels' are foot-soldiers for the MOSSAD. The so-called rebels can be traced to Libya where they were used to create the lie of a revolt against the Green Revolution, and before that to Serbia where they masqueraded as persecuted Albanians, sorry Kosovars.

Oh and being Catholic doesn't equate with being Fenian. This is the propaganda of the Establishment. Who benefits from intra-European division? Answers on a postcard to the Zionist Internationale, the Square Mile, Ocuppied London.

Anonymous said...

FC, Why are you more supportive of Assad than not?

Final Conflict said...

Because Syria is a SOVEREIGN NATION and when outside forces stir up armed rebellion against a state that has long stood fast against Zionism and is a bulwark against Israel, whatever its faults (real or perceived) we have to ask CUI BONO: who benefits?

Various external sources have cited alien special forces and secret state involvement (as in Libya) and so we have to side with a Sovereign State against Zionist-led insurgents (who will ironically probably lead to a more hardline islamic Syria, with terrible repurcussions for Syrian Christians - as in Iraq, Libya, Egypt etc).

Nothing is "straightforward" in the swirling chaos of the Middle East with Israel and America playing all sorts of cards behind the scenes; but we cannot remain quiet when an anti-Zionist Syria is attacked by "rebels" whose backing and leadership is so open to question.

Of course Zionists will come on here and condemn us with weasel words. We'll wear that as a badge of honour.

Syria is not our enemy. Neither is Iran. Only one country in the Middle East has illegal nukes, breaks UN Resolutions, drops white phosphorous on civilians...

Anonymous said...

Indeed, Syria is a sovereign nation but much as we argue against it, so is the Bandit State.

The Middle East is not only a region which suffers unduly from the interference of the U.S. on behalf of said Bandit State but there is also a need to draw attention to the ways of Saudi Arabia.

The Saudi is also a sovereign state which is the cause of all the strife in that region, most of the leading lights in Al-Qaeda were Saudi nationals, the Bin Ladens were/are one of the most influential families there, the Saudis are the major sponsors of mosques/madrasas in Europe/U.S. for which they also encourage Wahaabism.

So why would the U.S. be the main ally of such a state? and by association would the Bandit State also? 'Islamic extremism' a Mossad/CIA creation? maybe a conspiracy too far, but there is reason to question such a nefarious triumverate don't you think?

Anonymous said...

The British state is cleverer than the Syrian, because it manages to catch foreign insurgents; and attacks the people who oppose it within through far subtler means.

Twinkle Toes said...

We have no right to interfere with Syria. Get the hell out or it will all end in tears.


MusicPlaylistView Profile
Create a playlist at MixPod.com