Hypocrisy

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:14:13 +0400, www.freedomtofascism.com  
wrote:

>On Sat, 01 Nov 2008 19:21:37 +0300, www.freedomtofascism.com  
>wrote:
>
>>Geezus Kereist.
>>
>>Shut up Condi!
>>
>>Someone nuke the State Department, mucho pronto.
>>
>>http://english.pravda.ru/russia/kremlin/22-09-2008/106428-russia_condoleezza_rice-0
>>
>
>Looks like the State Department missed one of the biggest conspiracy loons
>(and liars) of all time!
>
>Conduhliesa Rice!
>http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/rice-bio.html
>
>Conduhliesa a Russian  expert!
>http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/15326_condy.html
>
>Ask Condoliesa about yellow cake uranium:
>http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=Condoleezza+Rice++yellow+cake&btnG=Search
>
>Even the CIA debunked that whopper!
>http://nuralcubicle.blogspot.com/2005/10/yellowcake-dossier-not-work-of-cia.html
>
>The hypocrisy of the US State Department never ends:
>
>From http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jul/27-595713.html
>
>How can a journalist or a news consumer tell if a story is true or false?
>There are no exact rules, but the following clues can help indicate if a
>story or allegation is true.
>
>Does the story fit the pattern of a conspiracy theory? 
>Does the story fit the pattern of an “urban legend?” 
>Does the story contain a shocking revelation about a highly controversial
>issue? 
>Is the source trustworthy? 
>What does further research tell you? 
>Does the story fit the pattern of a conspiracy theory?
>
>Does the story claim that vast, powerful, evil forces are secretly
>manipulating events?  If so, this fits the profile of a conspiracy theory.
>Conspiracy theories are rarely true, even though they have great appeal and
>are often widely believed.  In reality, events usually have much less
>exciting explanations.  
>
>The U.S. military or intelligence community is a favorite villain in many
>conspiracy theories.  
>
>For example, the Soviet disinformation apparatus regularly blamed the U.S.
>military or intelligence community for a variety of natural disasters as
>well as political events.  In March 1992, then-Russian foreign intelligence
>chief Yevgeni Primakov admitted that the disinformation service of the
>Soviet KGB intelligence service had concocted the false story that the AIDS
>virus had been created in a US military laboratory as a biological weapon.
>When AIDS was first discovered, no one knew how this horrifying new disease
>had arisen, although scientists have now used DNA analysis to determine that
>“all HIV-1 strains known to infect man” are closely related to a simian
>immunodeficiency virus found in a western equatorial African chimpanzee, Pan
>troglodytes troglodytes.  But the Soviets used widespread suspicions about
>the U.S. military to blame it for AIDS.  (More details on this.)
>
>In his book 9/11: The Big Lie, French author Thierry Meyssan falsely claimed
>that no plane hit the Pentagon on September 11, 2001.  Instead, he claimed
>that the building had been struck by a cruise missile fired by elements
>within the U.S. government.  No such vast conspiracy existed and many
>eyewitness accounts and evidence gathered on the scene confirmed that the
>hijacked airliner had struck the building.  But, nevertheless, the book was
>a best-seller in France and has been translated into 19 languages,
>demonstrating the power that even the most groundless conspiracy theories
>can have.  (More details on 9/11: The Big Lie.)
>
>Does the story fit the pattern of an “urban legend?”
>
>Is the story startlingly good, bad, amazing, horrifying, or otherwise
>seemingly “too good” or “too terrible” to be true?  If so, it may be an
>“urban legend.”  Urban legends, which often circulate by word of mouth,
>e-mail, or the Internet, are false claims that are widely believed because
>they put a common fear, hope, suspicion, or other powerful emotion into
>story form.  
>
>For example, after the September 11 attacks, a story arose that someone had
>survived the World Trade Center collapse by “surfing” a piece of building
>debris from the 82nd floor to the ground.  Of course, no one could survive
>such a fall, but many initially believed this story, out of desperate hope
>that some people trapped in the towers miraculously survived their collapse.
>(More details on this.)
>
>Another September 11 urban legend is that an undamaged Bible was found in
>the midst of the crash site at the Pentagon.  In reality, it was a
>dictionary.  But, if a Bible had survived unscathed, that would have seemed
>much more significant, and been seen by many as a sign of divine
>intervention.  (More details on this.)
>
>Since 1987, the false story that Americans or others are kidnapping or
>adopting children in order to use them in organ transplants has been widely
>believed.  There is absolutely no evidence that any such event has ever
>occurred, but such allegations have won the most prestigious journalism
>prizes in France in 1995 and Spain in 1996.  (More details on this.)
>
>This urban legend is based on fears about both organ transplantation and
>international adoptions, both of which were relatively new practices in the
>1980s.  As advances in medical science made organ transplantation more
>widespread, unfounded fears began to spread that people would be murdered
>for their organs.  At the same time, there were also unfounded fears about
>the fate of infants adopted by foreigners and taken far from their home
>countries.  The so-called “baby parts” rumor combined both these fears in
>story form, which gave it great credibility even though there was absolutely
>no evidence for the allegation.  
>
>In late 2004, a reporter for Saudi Arabia’s Al Watan newspaper repeated a
>version of the organ trafficking urban legend, falsely claiming that U.S.
>forces in Iraq were harvesting organs from dead or wounded Iraqis for sale
>in the United States.  This shows how the details of urban legends can
>change, to fit different circumstances.  (More details in English and
>Arabic.)
>
>Highly controversial issues
>
>AIDS, organ transplantation, international adoption, and the September 11
>attacks are all new, frightening or, in some ways, discomforting topics.
>Such highly controversial issues are natural candidates for the rise of
>false rumors, unwarranted fears and suspicions.  Another example of a highly
>controversial issue is depleted uranium, a relatively new armor-piercing
>substance that was used by the U.S. military for the first time during the
>1991 Gulf War.  
>
>There are many exaggerated fears about depleted uranium because people
>associate it with weapons-grade uranium or fuel-grade uranium, which are
>much more dangerous substances.  When most people hear the word uranium, a
>number of strongly held associations spring to mind, including the atomic
>bomb, Hiroshima, nuclear reactors, radiation illness, cancer, and birth
>defects.  
>
>Depleted uranium is what is left over when natural uranium is enriched to
>make weapons-grade or fuel-grade uranium.  In the process, the uranium
>loses, or is depleted, of almost half its radioactivity, which is how
>depleted uranium gets its name.  But facts like this are less important in
>peoples’ minds than the deeply ingrained associations they have with the
>world “uranium.”  For this reason, most people believe that depleted uranium
>is much more dangerous than it actually is.  (More details on depleted
>uranium in English and Arabic.)
>
>Another highly controversial issue is that of forbidden weapons, such as
>chemical or biological weapons.  The United States is regularly, and
>falsely, accused of using these weapons.  (More details on this in English
>and Arabic.)
>
>In the same way, many other highly controversial issues are naturally prone
>to misunderstanding and false rumors.  Any highly controversial issue or
>taboo behavior is ripe material for false rumors and urban legends.  
>
>Consider the source
>
>Certain websites, publications, and individuals are known for spreading
>false stories, including:
>
>Aljazeera.com, a deceptive, look-alike website that has sought to fool
>people into thinking it is run by the Qatari satellite television station Al
>Jazeera 
>Jihad Unspun, a website run by a Canadian woman who converted to Islam after
>the September 11 attacks when she became convinced that Osama bin Laden was
>right 
>Islam Memo (Mafkarat-al-Islam), which spreads a great deal of disinformation
>about Iraq.  
>(More details on Islam Memo and Jihad Unspun in English and Arabic.)
>
>There are many conspiracy theory websites, which contain a great deal of
>unreliable information.  Examples include:
>
>Rense.com 
>Australian “private investigator” Joe Vialls, who died in 2005 
>Conspiracy Planet 
>Extremist groups, such as splinter communist parties, often publish
>disinformation.  This can be especially difficult to identify if the false
>allegations are published by front groups.  Front groups purport to be
>independent, non-partisan organizations but actually controlled by political
>parties or groups.  Some examples of front groups are:
>
>The International Action Center, which is a front group for a splinter
>communist party called the Workers World Party 
>The Free Arab Voice, a website that serves as a front for Arab communist
>Muhammad Abu Nasr and his colleagues.  
>(More details on Muhammad Abu Nasr in English or Arabic.)  
>
>Research the allegations
>
>The only way to determine whether an allegation is true or false is to
>research it as thoroughly as possible.  Of course, this may not always be
>possible given publication deadlines and time pressures, but there is no
>substitute for thorough research, going back to the original sources.  Using
>the Internet, many allegations can be fairly thoroughly researched in a
>matter of hours.
>
>For example, in July 2005, the counter-misinformation team researched the
>allegation that U.S. soldiers in Iraq had killed innocent Iraqi boys playing
>football and then “planted” rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs) next to them,
>to make it appear that they were insurgents.  
>
>Using a variety of search terms in “Google,” a researcher was able to find
>the article and photographs upon which the allegations were based.  Because
>weapons did not appear in the initial photographs, but did appear in later
>photographs, some observers believed this was evidence that the weapons had
>been planted and that the boys who had been killed were not armed
>insurgents.
>
>The researcher was also able to find weblog entries (numbered 100 and 333,
>on June 26 and July 15, 2005) from the commanding officer of the platoon
>that was involved in the incident and another member of his platoon.  The
>weblog entries made it clear that:
>
>the teenaged Iraqi boys were armed insurgents; 
>after the firefight between U.S. troops and the insurgents was over, the
>dead, wounded and captured insurgents were initially photographed separated
>from their weapons because the first priority was to make sure that it was
>impossible for any of the surviving insurgents to fire them again; 
>following medical treatment for the wounded insurgents, they were
>photographed with the captured weapons displayed, in line with Iraqi
>government requirements; 
>the insurgents were hiding in a dense palm grove, where visibility was
>limited to 20 meters, not a likely place for a football game, and they were
>seen carrying the RPGs on their shoulders. 
>Thus, an hour or two of research on the Internet was sufficient to establish
>that the suspicions of the bloggers that the weapons had been planted on
>innocent Iraqi boys playing football were unfounded.
>
>Finally, if the counter-misinformation team can be of help, ask us.  We
>can’t respond to all requests for information, but if a request is
>reasonable and we have the time, we will do our best to provide accurate,
>authoritative information.  
>
>Created: 27 Jul 2005 Updated: 27 Jul 2005 
>
>http://usinfo.state.gov/media/Archive/2005/Jul/27-595713.html

www.rense.com and www.conspiracyplanet.com  are number 1 and number 2 on the
State Department's hit list.

Ever wonder why?

Could it be that Conduhliesa and the State Department can't stand hearing
truth?

Please don't tell the Russians, they figured that out a LONG time ago.''

Condi can't even speak Russian.  She probably got her PHd at one of those
American Universities which grant a 10th grade education masquerading as
a PHd.  Or else she got lucky won the prize at MacDonalds.  Or slept with
George W.