More ‘Orwell’ in America

Here is another story that provides examples of two more claims I repeatedly make and try to get my reader to see, understand and accept as the reality in which we now live:

 

Wikipedia Entry on Obama/Biden ‘Forward’ Slogan Scrubbed of References to ‘Leftwing Newspapers & Publications’

Writing on President Obama’s recently unveiled campaign slogan, one anonymous Wikipedia user contributed the following: “On April 30th, 2012 the Obama–Biden campaign announced the slogan ‘Forward.’”

“The name Forward has been frequently used as a name for influential leftwing newspapers and publications, denoting an urge for progress,” the entry added in a section titled “controversy.”

However, after the entry came under heavy criticism, the “controversy” section has been scrubbed:

 

This story represents:

 

A — An example of a story/information detrimental to this Administration being ‘scrubbed’ from the internet (this happens a lot with Van Jones and Steven Lerner).

 

B — The ‘Orwellian’ practice of revising the past to control the present.  What was originally posted on Wiki was actually true, but it has been scrubbed.  Since when does ‘erasing’ the truth represent ‘responsible’ behavior – especially for a supposedly ‘serious’ encyclopedia?

 

Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.

–George Orwell

 

Naturally, there will be many who will refuse to see what is happening right in front of them, but then, these are the same people who so often ask “How could the Germans have fallen for Hitler.”

 

5 thoughts on “More ‘Orwell’ in America

  1. You want Orwellian? I’ll give you Orwellian!

    The *theory* that Saddam Hussein was *conspiring* with his government to manufacture and hide WMD’s and that he intended to use them against the west is – by definition – a ‘conspiracy theory’. A conspiracy theory which was eventually proven to be wrong. Those who believed in this CT or were influenced by peer pressure to accept it unquestioningly (deference to authority and hierarchy) ended up costing the UK and US $trillions, costing military families their loved ones, costing soldiers their lives (and limbs, and mental health for the rest of their lives), costing the Iraqi people their entire society and a million lives and costing the environment unfathomable damage.

    That makes it a very costly (in every sense of the word) conspiracy theory. These devastating effects will be felt for generations to come. It is very sad.

    The governments who were the main promoters of this conspiracy theory will all be enjoying their luxurious retirement (many already are). Meanwhile, generations who were not even born when this conspiracy theory was being promoted and acted upon will be forced (via taxation) to pay back the massive loans taken out in their names in order to pay for the devastation wreaked by this particular conspiracy theory.

    Other government conspiracy theories circulating at the moment include the conspiracy theory that everyone from cave dwellers in Afghanistan to your next door neighbour is quite likely to be conspiring at this moment to blow themselves up in a public place. The proponents of this conspiracy theory insist the threat to human life is so great that even children must be forced to have their crotches frisked by men wearing special blue costumes, just to make absolutely sure they aren’t hiding any bombs down there. The promoters of this conspiracy theory insist they are not being paranoid. These same conspiracy theorists also insist that all our freedoms and rights be taken away and a centralised high tech, police state, surveillance control grid set up in its place to protect us from this ‘threat’ (tinfoil hats optional). All this is despite the reality (the evidence) which tell us that DIY accidents or lightening strikes pose more of a threat to human life than international and ‘homegrown’ terrorism (statistically speaking).

    And so if you supported, say, the Iraq invasion of 2003 you were – by definition – supporting a conspiracy theory. And one for which you had absolutely no hard evidence for whatsoever.

    In addition, when anyone *questions* and *challenges* government conspiracy theories (and the true motives behind them) and demand to see compelling evidence that would back them up, the government and the mass media labels them as ‘conspiracy theorists’.

    This is perhaps the finest example yet of what George Orwell called ‘double think’.

    And just like the brainwashed German public of 70 years ago, very few people today will be able to escape the effects of their life long subjection to propaganda to even comprehend what I am talking about.

    • First: your comment is very welcome, but I see it as a bit of a red herring. It doesn’t really address the issue at hand, and here’s why I say this:

      With respect, your point(s) are not ‘doublethink.’ Double think is holding two, opposing, self-contradicting ideas in one’s mind at the same time. This does not meet that definition.

      Second – and with respect (honestly) – you are wrong in your accusations that the WMD’s did not exist and that this has been proven. They did – in fact – exist, and that has been proven CORRECT! I have personal knowledge of this.

      HOWEVER, you ARE correct in that their existence was used to manipulate public opinion and to provide excuse for a war. I fought in the first Gulf War, I was there. I understand this issue from a different perspective. There were reasons to be there, but the foundations necessary to success were not, are not now and it does not appear that they are likely to arise any time soon: that being a love of individual liberty in the people.

      Which brings us to the next mistake in your comment: there ARE people looking to end this nation and the Western way of life. Your characterization of the enemy is self-service and – frankly – insulting to our enemy. They may be forced to hide in caves – sometimes. But they (the leaders and planners) are very intelligent, mostly schooled in elite Western colleges. They are also well funded, disciplined and highly motivated. Finally, they have not only declared our destruction to be their life ambition, they have told us it is their religious duty. To ignore this is to ignore Hitler telling the world what he believed his purpose in life was.

      Besides, there are reliable reports from the intelligence committee that tell us that it is very likely at least 1 nuclear weapon has made its way into the U.S. I doubt you will believe it because of your distrust for the military, but I would warn you NOT to distrust the foot soldier. It is his political master (generals and CIA.NSA directors) who has the agenda here – not the grunt. And it is the grunts who are trying to blow the whistle, and their political masters and accomplices (media, etc) who are squashing their warnings. This is how 9/11 happened, it is how we will commit national suicide the next time.

  2. There were no nukes, B. If there had been any WMD’s in Iraq, don’t you think Bush would have trumpeted that fact from the rooftops?There is a severe lack of evidence for your point of view, and logic is on my side. Unless you come up with some facts, you are just calling for the sky to fall in.
    The first gulf war was us acting as mercenaries, protecting a non-democratic, female-suppressing monarchy from a dictatorship. As bad as Saddam was, he was better than the Saudis, who funded the schools that taught the haters that flew into our buildings.

    • A WMD does not HAVE to mean ‘nuke,’ G. To argue that this was the ONLY thing the govt. claimed Sadam had is to argue an untruth.

      There WERE nerve and gas agents found, as well as rockets sufficient to carry them to most any point in the region. There is hard fact of this. There is equally strong evidence that many of these weapons were moved to Syria. These are FACTS as they WERE reported – but just like the reports about Obama having to be FORCED to give the order to attack OBL, they were squashed shortly after they hit the wires because they did not fit the narrative. Still, the troops on the ground have persisted in reporting what they found, and now – IF YOU BOTHER TO PAY ATTENTION – you will occasionally find stories about WMD’s in Syria and the ‘suspicions’ that they came from Iraq.

      As for the first Gulf War being mercenary: yes, to some extent, but it was over oil, not the BS you mentioned. And the oil was to preserve your way of life – if not your life directly (without oil, MANY Americans will die – literally). Nor can I agree with you in the Saudis being worse than Sadam. They were both evil, one just happened to be secular and less powerful.

      • Let me also add that Gulf 1 was to preserve the very lives of as many Iraqis as possible. The UN and the US were placed in a horrible situation by their stupidity in believing that Saddam could be removed by the Iraqi people. 13 years of sanctions killed over 1 million Iraqis, hundreds of thousands of whom were children and yet Saddam was still in power.

        The choice became to capitulate and end the sanctions, thereby telling every dictator that intransigence and brutality would win, or to go to war and to remove Saddam by main force.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.