Break out of the Matrix

Re posted from     

Paris attacks, Missouri U protests

The uses of propaganda

by Jon Rappoport

November 17, 2015

“After catastrophic events, the propaganda machines start rolling. Opportunities abound. The goal is: use the disaster to boost a current agenda, when there really is no connection at all. It’s called a non-sequitur. It’s perfect food for dim minds.” (The Underground, Jon Rappoport)

Let’s look at how propaganda arising out of the Paris attacks will be deployed in the upcoming Climate Summit.

File this under: how much hay will global elites make from the Paris attacks?

Also file it under: the use of complete non-sequiturs as propaganda, to achieve desired results.

Let’s consider the Paris Climate Summit (COP21), scheduled to start on November 30 in Paris. No less than 120 nations will be represented by their heads of state, including Obama. Somewhere between 20 and 40 thousand credentialed representatives are going to attend.

That gives you some idea of the importance of the event. This is a big deal. Very big. As the Scientific American states in “Paris Attack Will Not Halt Global Climate Talks”:

“The two weeks of talks begin Nov. 30 and will take place at Le Bourget airfield on the outskirts of Paris. They are expected to culminate in a new international agreement to lower greenhouse gas emissions and possibly put in place a system by which nearly 200 countries can regularly enact new and stronger climate targets.”

The Paris summit is the most ambitious effort yet to impose the pseudoscience of global warming on the planet. Lower CO2 emissions, carbon taxes, cap and trade, the whole works. Result? Reduce energy output and supplies for all nations, deepening poverty, increasing chaos.

Now, to sample the flavor of comments on the Climate Summit, in the wake of the Paris attacks, here are statements reported, again, by the Scientific American:

“Diplomats from New Zealand to the Maldives said they believe the vicious assaults on ordinary citizens are precisely the reason the 21st Conference of the Parties (COP 21) to the U.N. climate convention must still convene as planned. U.S. President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry will be among nearly 120 heads of state attending.”

“’COP 21 has to take place; otherwise, it would mean being weak and scared by terrorism, which would be for them an additional victory,’ Pascal Canfin, France’s former minister of development, told ClimateWire.”

“Agreed Jeffrey Waheed, deputy permanent representative of the Maldives to the United Nations, ‘We cannot acquiesce to brutality. It is important that terror attacks don’t dissuade us from what’s most important to the international community.’”

Getting the picture?

Here comes the non-sequitur: “solidarity in the face of terrorism” among nations equals: “we must all agree on deeper enforcement of climate rules.” That’s the pitch, that’s the propaganda.

Logically, it makes no sense, it’s an idiot’s dance, but whoever said propaganda relies on logic?

You’re going to hear this kind of thing: “If we convene in Paris and can’t come up with hard agreements on climate enforcement, we’ll be dishonoring all those who died in the attacks…”

And this: “We have one chance now to show how determined we are to forge a global community, not just for climate agreements, but for all that is good, against the brutal killers who assaulted this great city…”

Connecting two ideas that don’t go together is one of the prime strategies of propagandists—and you can see it’s already being used in this case. Again, we’re not talking about some small attempt to forge climate rules. This is a huge piece of the Globalist agenda, because it drives all nations deeper into poverty and energy deficits, under the guise of “saving the planet.”

power outside the matrix

In the case of the University of Missouri student protests, where the accusations of horrendous racism on campus have, so far, proven to be largely a hoax, the propaganda was all about the “power of students to force change.” The president of the University, Tim Wolfe, was targeted, and he quickly resigned.

But the truth is, the University football team forced Wolfe out, and his instant capitulation had nothing to do with racism. It had to do with money. Thirty football players were ready to boycott the team’s next game with BYU, and if they refused to take the field, Missouri would have to pay BYU a million dollars. But that was only the beginning of the $$ problem.

Since 2012, the U of Missouri has been part of the vaunted SEC (Southeastern Conference), the most powerful college football consortium of teams in America. The SEC has 14 member teams in 10 states. In 2014-15, the SEC paid its members $455 million.

If the Missouri football boycott spread to other SEC teams, the whole system could collapse, and this would have repercussions far beyond the SEC. We’re talking television contracts, advertisers, student bodies addicted to football. We’re talking about a “national pastime,” future Bowl games, the whole national playoff system.

Tim Wolfe took about five minutes to decide to resign, once he realized what was at stake. You can bet a few heavy hitters from the television networks and the SEC were on the phone to him, pronto.

Forget Wolfe’s public mea culpa. He was protecting the financial football establishment. He literally took one for the team.

The propaganda, and the ensuing college copycat protests at other schools, like Amherst, “showing solidarity” with the U of Missouri, all lead back to money. To football. To the billion-dollar bonanza industry that must not be derailed. As soon as Wolfe resigned, the Missouri student who was on a protest hunger strike (his father reportedly makes $8 million a year) started eating again. The football players went back on the field and got ready for their next game.

All the hoopla and propaganda about a moral victory against racism is a sham. It was a victory for football.

And you have to wonder: If the Missouri team was undefeated, on the verge of securing a spot in the national playoffs, instead of sporting a mediocre 5-4 record at the time, would 30 players have threatened to boycott their next game and risked taking themselves out of the championship picture? I doubt it.

Propaganda: it can be used in the aftermath of a disaster to promote an ongoing agenda, or it can be used to explain (wrongly) why something happened, in order to promote an ongoing agenda.

It works like magic when the target audience is uninformed and incurious.

Jon Rappoport

Leave a Reply